Tuesday, 27 January 2009

TICAP Tuesday 27th January PM

Almost ready to recommence (picture above missing of about a dozen late-returning attendees). This morning's events can be read further down or by clicking here

Since it was a rush to set up the blog this morning, there was no time to link to the conference schedule. That, and the list of speakers and their areas of expertise, can be viewed here.

15:00: John Gray, Chairman of TICAP, reads out a statement from Professor Rein Vos, who suffered attempts by anti-smokers to bully him into not attending. He stated that they were not successful, and that poor health is the reason for his regretful absence. The statement reaffirmed his view of the insincere nature of the anti-smoking lobby.

Just realised that the template was set up to disallow anonymous comments. That has been amended, so you don't need a Google account to post comments. Please leave your name somewhere in the comment though.

Other groups not yet mentioned. Italy, Denmark, Holland, Sweden.

Problems with the live videocall to Dr Gio Gori (blame the EU), so we move on ...

15:15 Christopher Snowdon rises to speak of the history of anti-tobacco and the passive smoking fraud. A brief rundown of when anti-tobacco was a grass roots volunteer organisation in the late 18th and 19th century (GASP), which only resurfaced in the 1970s as ASH.

Chris lists a few examples of the many pharmaceutical companies and the amounts they contribute to anti-tobacco. For example, Robert Wood Johnson foundation alone donated £450m since 1991. He explains that their investment leads to huge profits, by 2007 Chantix alone yielded income of £883m.

Chris Snowdon: Anti-tobacco likes to portray itself as a David against a Goliath ... it certainly is, but it's not anti-tobacco holding the slings and the stones.

15:33 Chris highlights that the huge investments in anti-tobacco from nicotine replacement suppliers should be viewed as a conflict of interest, and their research viewed as suspiciously as one would view such research from Philip Morris etc.

In an ideal world, research on health would be done by independent bodies, he realises that this is not possible, but such research should be done in a transparent manner.

Chris finishes by referring to the EU cancellation as evidence that anti-tobacco stifles debate, and is undemocratic.

Chris Snowdon: "Bureaucrats and lobbyists in the anti-smoking lobby have not only lost touch with real people, they have also proved themselves to be unaccountable ..."

The hastily-arranged videocall link could not be reinstated, so instead, a recorded presentation by Dr Gio Gori, on the passive smoking fraud, is shown.

Dr Gori methodically dismantles the science behind the passive smoking fraud, with the evidence the vast majority of readers will be aware of. Flaws with measurement, figures produced without proof, deliberate confusion of dose and risk etc., along with a graph showing 24 other factors with higher risk than the 1.21 attributed to ETS by the anti-smoking lobby.

15:55 Dr Gori finishes with a glimmer of hope.

DrGori: "New USA legislation will encourage the production and advertising of less hazardous cigarettes. It is poised to relax or cancel abolitionist policies."

Let's hope he is proved correct, but I'll believe it when I see it.

16:00 Iro Cyr from CAGE (Canada) reads a message to the conference by Professor Robert Molimard, Prof. emeritus of physiology and co-ordinator of the DIU of Tabacologie to the Faculty of Medicine Paris-South ... phew!)

He states that he has no link to tobacco, and does not smoke, but is worried how smokers are being treated. He began to study tobacco dependence 32 years ago, and states, "Let us be clear, the only victims of tobacco are the smokers themselves."

Prof. Molimard: "I am deeply affected by the troubling rising tide of hindrances to freedom. Littl by little the walls are closing in.

There are no 'small freedoms'. We have to fight fiercely to stan up for every one of them."

16:15 Coffee break for 15 mins

16:30 General Discussion. If you have any questions, post them in comments and I'll try to put them to the panel.

The videocall with Dr Gori in Washington has been reinstated so he is available for questions too.

16:50 Canadian attendee asks Chris Snowdon if he thinks Government should reduce funds to anti-tobacco charities. He replies: "I don't think these charities should be funded by Government at all." He further explains that the charities are funded by Governments, to fool the public that Government policies are receiving public support.

Chris is asked how this message can be spread. He replies that "we just have to keep telling people. They aren't aware that this is happening. If they knew, many would be appalled."

A Spanish delegate asks how the accounts can be obtained. Chris Snowdon replies that in the UK it is very simple (for example ASH Wales receives 0.3% of income from donations), but other countries differ. He points to the EU as not transparent seening as they haven't even disclosed their own accounts for over a decade.

Frederique DuPont pointed out the difference in warnings on packets, from warnings and pictures within the EU, but almost nothing in the US. Maryetta Ables from Forces USA exhibits a packet which has a small warning on the side of the packet, and not in a bold type. She refers to studies which have found that large warnings have been shown to encourage children to smoke, which may explain why the US haven't been tougher on this.

Dave Atherton of Freedom 2 Choose asks Dr Gori why the US Surgeon General has allowed such epidemiological fraud to escape untested. Dr Gori explains that a lot of the problem is "money". Pharmaceutical companies are very valuable to the US Government.

Some good passionate ideas from the floor as to how to press the message to politicians.

The Laird of Glencairn's question is asked of Chris Snowdon, he runs through how the figures on heart attacks in Scotland are quite lierally impossible (laughing as he does so by the way), and comments,

Chris Snowdon: "Shame on the BMJ for publishing that, frankly"

He carries on with more explanation of how 'Third Hand Smoke' is also nonsense and that methods like this are thrown out every now and then to see what works and what doesn't. He couldn't comment about potential press releases from TICAP.

17:30 Christoph Lovenich (Germany), chairing this afternoon, says that he will give an answer about press releases after the question session.

Gian Turci is giving a comprehensive explanation of the history of 'safer cigarettes' in answer to a question about their potential future development in the US, from Iro Cyr (Canada). This is following the 'glimmer of hope' earlier from Dr Gori.

Gian Turci: "There are two types of anti-smoker. The ones who don't want it banned as they want their paycheck, and the ones like some over [at the EU] who do because "I hate it, hate it, hate it, and don't want others to do it"

17:40 Nick Hogan states that adverts saying that smokers 'kill children' are tantamount to hate crime on smokers, why are we not protected from hate crime. Mr Bloom replied that the hate crime legislation has certain parameters and if you don't fal between those parameters, the law doesn't cover that type of hate.

A discussion is prompted by the Quebec delegate, as to why employers are allowed to discriminate against smokers, but not against any other minorities.

17:55 Chris Snowdon adding a little to the discrimination debate before closing remarks.

17:59 Day one closes a minute early. Back again tomorrow.


  1. Surely the Anti-Smokers who tried to prevent

    Professor Rein Vos attending the conference

    should be prosecuted.

  2. I agree Nick, this is an ABSOLUTE DISGRACE.

    The Laird of Glencairn.

  3. wait... you want to prosecute them in the name of free speech ?


  4. Information from " The Ferret"

    This is just a part of the taxpayers money

    spent on Anti-Smoking:-

    16 April 2007 E-1275/2007

    Answer given by Mr Kyprianou on behalf of the Commission
    The ‘HELP — for a life without tobacco’ campaign is funded through the Community Tobacco Fund (budget heading 17.0302).

    The ‘Community Tobacco Fund’ was set up under Article 13 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2075/92 of 30 June 1992 on the common organisation of the market in raw tobacco(1). The fund results from a levy on the aid granted for the production of raw tobacco within the framework of the common agricultural policy. This means that the campaign budget is not competing with other European public health budgets.

    The campaign was launched in March 2005 and is expected to run for four years, until the end of 2008, with an approximate budget of EUR 14.4 million per year. There is no national envelope per country, the aim being to achieve the same media pressure all over Europe.

    Covering 27 Member States and translated in all European Union languages, the ‘HELP’ campaign is today one of the largest international public health campaigns ever designed and run. During the first 18 months (March 2005 to September 2006) more than 30 000 television (TV) spots, broadcast on more than 80 national TV channels, achieved more than 1.7 billion contacts within the target group of young people. In parallel, more than 1.6 million single visits were observed on the ‘HELP’ website (www.help-eu.com) and almost 4 000 press articles were triggered in the European press.

  5. Jules said...
    wait... you want to prosecute them in the name of free speech ?


    These people that tried to stop Rein Vos

    attending the conference used bullying tactics

    against an individual.

    Laird of Glencairn

  6. Hope someone hilights the despicable use of children in the latest ad campaigns that use emotional blackmail and put fear into children that their parents are going to die.

  7. It's not just the ads Antony, they are turning

    the children into Spies.

    An angry Parent.

  8. My children know I am going to die.

    They've seen my will and can't wait.

  9. Will the Conference pass any resolutions, and

    if so will they seek a retraction from the

    Scottish Government that the 17% drop in

    heart attacks ( announced on 10 Sept 2007 )

    is false, or at least, economical with the

    truth. It is still being quoted in the


    Laird of Glencairn

  10. The lies and corruption are obvious for all to see with the vested financial interests of these companies along with the dubious science.
    This is not the way for the world to move forward.
    Governments have to stop spending tax-payers money on these so-called 'charities'

  11. With regard to the Less Hazardous Cigarettes - was it pointed out to the delegates that it was the anti-smoking 'charities' that lobbied against these all those years ago and so the research came to a halt?
    They have a lot to answer for, I believe.

  12. Don't know if this has been asked here but I could probably guess the answer to this question - Are you allowed to smoke in the building you are currently in?


  13. Anyone who believes the science on third hand smoke needs serious help.
    It was a survey of people who were asked their thoughts on it and passed off as a scientific study!
    How bad do these anti-smokers get?

  14. Helen, yes it was mentioned, and Carl, no we are not ... but the MEPs over the road are. As Godfrey Bloom said this morning:

    "... which goes to prove that there is one rule for you, and another rule for us"

  15. Just goes to show there still is a strong class divide and todays politicians are just like kings & queens of old.


  16. Glad that the issue of smoking and employment is being raised. It's starting to happen here in the UK now and is causing health problems for many, as being out of work and social deprivation can.

  17. Great to see that the conference is go! Looks like there is a nice attendance too. Are we getting any press coverage?

  18. Thanks very much for this Dick. It has been great to follow events.

    Please say hello to the gang for me, and let them know how sorry I am that I couldnt get there. I leave Malta for Libya tomorrow and will be away for two weeks. I would have had a beer for the TICAP delegates and speakers but there is a wee alcohol prohibition issue in Libya. I will smoke a shisha pipe instead!

    Good luck for tomorrow!


    Colin Grainger
    Freedom to Choose.

  19. Since fox hunting was banned, could the conference suggest a new sport for all to take part in
    Like “ash hunting” riding around the country seeking members of “ash” when found we could
    Hit them with a club, once for every pub, club, and bingo hall closed since the ban.

    It could even be televised like big brother?
    Yours truly, mr bankrupt bingo

  20. Thanks, Dick, for your ad hoc reports.

  21. I have put a little piece together on YOutube about the conference and your blog Dick..here:


    AKA John H Baker

  22. Alcohol probhition! Where!!! Oh Libia..is that anywhere near Middlesbrough???

    The Big Yinster.

    Dick, you are a star!

  23. Thanks Dick for the great coverage that you have provided today.

  24. Thanks Dick, you are doing a grand job.

  25. How much mony did Dr Gori receive from tobacco companies ?

    What a fake guru.

  26. Anonymous 20:10

    Probably not as much as the saint of anti-smoking, Richard Doll, got from big business:


    Now there's a fake guru for you.

  27. Dick, thanks for doing this - it means that those of us who can't be there can still actually paticipate. (Actually, I'm not prone to it, but I almost feel like weeping because, at last, people are meeting and willing to stand on a platform and publicly denounce the 'science', the vested interests and the appalling way that smokers are being treated.

    If there are questions tomorrow, I'd be interested in how action can be moved forward. Is there a planned, co-ordinated strategy in place and is there eg a central database of individuals willing to pledge time to help implement the strategic actions?

    Enjoy tomorrow!


  28. Saucepan : worst attempt ever to distract attention.

    How much money did Gori receive from the industry ? And Luik ?

  29. I think we have an anti troll. Actually, all antis are trolls that are busy stalking smokers.

    Any reaction from the press?

  30. It seems ASH's finances aren't as solid as they should be :S http://www.charity-commission.gov.uk/ShowCharity/RegisterOfCharities/CharityWithPartB.aspx?RegisteredCharityNumber=262067&SubsidiaryNumber=0

  31. Sorry that last post was by me....Carl

  32. Thanks for this Dick - it's been a very busy day for you. Great that we can follow events when we're unable to be there.

    Anonymous, what about the tactics now implemented by the pharmaceutical industry and governments to finance antitobacco and monopolize scientific information? I think we all know who the biggest funding villain is, don't we.

    It's great that this conference went ahead and the opportunity to expose this provided.

  33. Soren.

    i'm a smoker.
    what'd ya say ?

    Helend : a "tu quoque" is the weakest possible answer... I didn't hear you say Gori or Luik are not thriving on industry money ?

  34. Anonymous. I don't believe you asked me that question - you directed that question to someone else.

    I asked you my own question about the biggest funding villain in all this. More like 'the pot calling the kettle' than a 'tu quoque' in my opinion.


  35. Dick,

    Thank you for a very good overview of the conference so far.

    There are many important issues to discuss in the 2 days booked, and many anti democratic vested interests to be shown the light of day and be exposed.

    It looks as though DK is unlikely to attend due to server problems with the LPUK websites and others that he hosts, so am very pleased to see your blog bringing us all up to date.

  36. Anonymous,

    Gori hasn't received any money from the tobacco industry, he was director of smoking and health for the National Cancer Institute, the NCI employed the tobacco industry to assist development of safer cigarettes before that was blocked by fascist, anti scumbags who don't like washing their cardigans.

    Gori has been at the forefront of tobacco control for over 50 years.

    Now why don't you debate the things he says rather than attempt to discredit him?

  37. Steve :

    Gori did get paid : here's a copy of the contract where the industry hires Gori as a consultant. The salary (50.000 US$ a year) is mentioned in the document.

    What did you say ?

  38. to show their gratitude for his work as a consultant : another payment

    just what di you say ?

    Gori is a rat.

  39. Anonymous,

    Actually I think you will find that the biggest share of tobacco money goes to the anti-tobacco "charities" courtesy of the Master Settlement Agreement.

    Now......What did YOU say!

    BTW Try putting your name to your statements you cowardly craven scumbag.

    Tony Halford.

  40. DR. Gio Batta Gori is a well-known and recognised spokeperson and consultant for the tobacco industry:

    It's stange that this information was left out of its biography in the conference presentation:

    Something to hide ???

    Also, as a recognised consultant of tobacco industries, Dr. Gori knows about the studies done directly by the tobacco industries themselfs, studies that had to be made public as a consequence of the Master Settlement Agreement, and that everyone can read, here for example:

    For example, a study about second-hand smoke in planes:

    a study about second-hand smoke in restaurants:

    a summary of studies made on rats:

    All arrive to the same conclusion:
    "We will never find an unbiased scientist who concludes that ETS exposure has been proven safe for non-smokers."

    A big summary of all that can be found on a document that is DIRECTLY on the web site of Altria, company owner of Philip Morris:
    (page 1239: "Internally, Defendants Recognized that ETS Is Hazardous to Nonsmokers")

    So it's easy to speak about lobbying of pharmaceutical companies. But how to explain that tobacco industries themselves believe that second-hand smoke is dangerous for non-smokers ???

    It's a bit of a shame that Dr. Gori, well aware of those studies, didn't talk a bit about them.

    Again, something to hide ???

  41. The big, fat rat in that business is Stanton Glantz. No one else.


  42. Anonymous;

    Like I said, Gori hasn't received any money from the tobacco industry and neither has anyone else at the conference. They all spoke for free, now how many of your pals would do that?

    Is this still the best you Fascists can come up with? A handful of Execs in a couple of US tobacco companies told some lies in 1957 and because of that the hundreds of millions of people who have worked with the industry since are not allowed to talk?

    Lol, if that is the case then every anti in the world should be silenced with immediate effect because nothing but lies has ever dribbled from their mouths for decades.

    I'll type slowly so you Fascists can take it all in between goose steps...

    If you want to make safer cars you work with the car industry.

    If you want to make safer food you work with the food industry.

    Gori has spent a full career talking about the dangers of smoking and developing a safer product. Only scum like yourself would portray that as a bad thing and it is scum like you that has blocked safe cigarettes for 30 years while you promoted the passive smoke fraud.

    Now how about you tell me what is wrong with the things Gori says instead of the Fascist approach to silence him because of something a third party did 60 years ago? I'll be happy to put you right about that as well.

    Now, what did you say Nazi?

  43. Leave out the words 'scum' and 'nazi' and Steve didn't say anything. Which says a lot.

  44. Anonymous
    Steve appeared to have a lot to say even without those words.
    I for one am seeing things a lot more clearly now since this conference has taken place. No wonder the so-called 'charities' tried to stop it.
    It's great that this blog has taken place (seeing as the media have probably been instructed to ignore this from governments and charities).
    It allows the millions world-wide to view and understand exactly what's going on.
    A great thanks to all involved in organising this conference and its delivery.

  45. Anonymous said...

    "Leave out the words 'scum' and 'nazi' and Steve didn't say anything."

    Did I hit a nerve Nazi scum?

    Can't you explain why a scientist who has spent a lifetime making something safer should lose his right to freedom of speech?

    Other than your Fascist attempt to discredit him because he worked with someone who was in the same industry as someone else who told some lies over half a century ago that is.

    I see you still have not posted any problem you have with anything he has ever said. Much better for you just to attempt to stop him talking altogether right? You wouldn't want anything like the truth getting in the way of the social denormalisation project now would you?

  46. __-Steve-__ : I assume that your answers are for Anonymous, but somehow you didn't answers to my arguments.

    __-Steve-__ said...
    "Now how about you tell me what is wrong with the things Gori says"
    As told before, I would rather tell about what Gori DIDN'T tell, that is :
    1 - its relationship with tobacco industries. If it's NOT a problem, as you say, then why not saying it publicly ?
    2 - tobacco industries OWN studies.

    Because it's easy to denigrate studies made by others, casting a doubt about their motivation and/or their financing, invoquing conflits of interests and secret aganda of pharmaceutical companies.
    So it's easy to cast all WHO studies to the trash can, calling them "corrupted" because they can have been lobbyed.


    What are the arguments against studies made by the tobacco industrie ITSELF ? Certainly, they don't have conflicting interest with pharmaceutical companies. Certainly, they don't have ANY interest of proofing that second-hand smoke is harmful. Certainly, they didn't mascarade science and result to say that their products are dangerous for NON-SMOKERS.

    So what are the argument to denigrate those studies ? And if those studies can't be denigrated, then what to do about their results that secondhand smoke IS DANGEROUS ?

    Because by speaking ONLY of WHO studies and by denigrating them, one can only arrive to the conclusion that the secondhand smoke is not true, that's logical.
    But when you add the tobacco industries own studies to the equation, you arrive to a totally different conclusion : maybe all the WHO studies are wrong, but STILL, the secondhand smoke IS dangerous, because it is PROVEN by the tobacco industries OWN studies, studies that CAN'T be denigrated.

    It's a bit of "lying by ommission".

    So, you see, the main problem is not about what Gori told. It's really about what Gori DIDN'T told.

  47. kylegl

    Not sure which specific tobacco-industry sponsored studies you are referring to ... can you list them?

    Why is it that tobacco-sponsored studies that claim to establish a link between passive smoke and health CAN'T be denigrated? Because they reach the conclusion that you want them to reach? Any science is open to question ... especially when there might be political and economic pressure in the mix.

    The point is not who funds the studies but whether studies stand up to scrutiny.

    To my knowledge there are no scientific studies demonstrating that secondary smoke is lethal: only epidemiological studies making such claims. These studies don't provide proof: they are claims and can be challenged.

    Who has the relationship with the tobacco industries that is not being admitted to? What have tobacco companies to gain from supporting a conference against smoking bans, since bans always result in smoking rates going up?


  48. Belinda: I'm NOT talking about "tobacco-sponsored" studies. I'm talking about tobacco industries OWN PERSONNAL studies, NOT made public (that is, not before the Master Settelment judges FORCES THEM to make them public), in their OWN labs (well, bought lab).

    I DID give you the link to the list :
    A big summary of all that can be found on a document that is DIRECTLY on the web site of Altria, company owner of Philip Morris:
    (page 1239: "Internally, Defendants Recognized that ETS Is Hazardous to Nonsmokers")

    Why can't them be denigrated? Let me reformulate that: of course, you can question the scientific procedures used to do them, or the science behind.
    But you cannot denigrate them ONLY about their "financing" or being part of a pharmaceutical lobbying. Because they are NOT "sponsored", but because they are made ESPECIALLY by the tobaco industries, to see if there is a danger or not. They were made WELL BEFORE the first public study was made, and they were kept SECRET, until the Master Settlement didn't let them have choice.
    So you cannot see lobbying of any sort behind. And the fact is that all those studies get the same conclusion: SHS IS dangerous...

    Concerning scientific studies showing that secondhand smoke is cancerigenous, there are results of experiment on rats that are shown in the 1994 report summary:

    Finally, concerning the interest of tobacco industries, there are a LOT of internal documentations and directives (docs and directives that WASN'T AT ALL made to be public, on the contrary, that were "confidential", but that HAD to be made public by the judges) that affirm that SHS is the biggest problem of tobacco industries and that ALL should be done to deny it and cast doubt about it.
    So if the tobacco industrie believe that, in internal, I assume that they have a reason, maybe you should tell them that in fact they don't have to worry about it...

  49. kylegl,

    I didn't see your post, I'm struggling to understand your English and the link you provided above doesn't work.

    More than 92% of the statistical studies into ETS show absolutely no risk and there is no medical evidence that shows it to be harmful either.

    That shouldn't really be surprising; the average passive smoker is exposed to 5000 times less dosage than the cited safe level of direct smoking. (before the Fascists concocted this no safe level rubbish)

    Add to that the fact that passive smokers are exposed to thousands of times less than known and published safe levels for every component of smoke.

    Even if you don't follow the science common sense alone tells you ETS is harmless. Smokers are not health conscious by definition, they have a poor diet, far less exercise and they live and work in more polluted environments yet they don't suffer adverse health effects for 50 years. How long then would it take to harm a non smoker with a few wisps of smoke if it takes an unhealthy, heavy smoker 50 years? It's not rocket science to figure it out.

    Now why would Gori want to tell us that passive smoking is harmful? He knows full well that it isn't regardless of what Big T, Pharma or the Nazi's would have us believe.

    So your statement that it's not what Gori told us but what he didn't tell us makes no sense.

  50. Exactly he told us facts about the suppression of LHCs. Well said Steve. Im sorry i cannot believe Big T paid for him to speak.

  51. __Steve__: sorry for my bad english, really. So I will make it short.
    The following link works perfectly:

    Go directly to page 1239, in the section named:
    "Internally, Defendants Recognized that ETS Is Hazardous to Nonsmokers"

    It will provide you with links to internal documentation of tobacco industries (the one they had to put public thanks to the Master Settlement).

    Some of those documentations are describing studies that had been done directly by tobacco industries, and that tobacco industries didn't publish publicly (until the Master Settlement of course).
    Those studies are showing that SHS IS dangerous.

    As those studies don't have been published in the "standard" workflow (scientific journals, ...), I really think that they are NOT taken in account in the table from which you took the "92%".

    Read for yourself the internal documentation of tobacco industrials. Use the links provided in the altria document, and read the studies. I don't think any of you are aware of those, or of their results.

    That's of THOSE studies that I think Dr. Gori should have ALSO talked about.

  52. Links directs to philip morris internal documentation site (http://www.pmdocs.com/) doens't seems to work, but if you want to get the document, just search on http://www.pmdocs.com/ for the document number, that is for example 2057077801_7910

  53. kylegl it's not there:

    "Page Not Found

    The page that you are looking for or that you have book marked has been changed or no longer exists."

  54. And still on the other post you seems to have managed to access and read it...

  55. I tried and cant access them.

  56. Show me a non-smoker that is addicted to nicotine through ETS. You wont find one. Going by the propaganda, that nicotine is one of the worlds most addictive drugs, then if levels of so-called toxins in ETS are high then nicotine must be too, but no addicted non-smokers. What a surprise. A con of gigantic proportions. End of debate.