The Hypocrisy Of The Nanny State - Tobacco Commercials Banned For Health Concerns ... Oh Really!

ghostsofpompeii

Anyone here remember the last time they saw a cigarette ad on TV? Well I'll tell you the last time one aired. It was a Virginia Slim commercial on the Johnny Carson Tonight Show on January 1, 1971. Right after President Nixon signed the Public Health Cigarette Smoking Act which banned cigarette commercials from being aired on TV. Smokeless tobacco ads followed suit a decade later on August 28, 1986.

I'm not an advocate for cigarette smoking, which is why I smoke a pipe. But since all forms of tobacco are currently under siege by the FDA I thought shining a light on the hypocrisy of the Nanny State - which claims to have our well being in mind when making these decisions to strip away certain rights - while casting a blind eye in another direction when a sacred cash cow, potentially an even greater danger to our health, is not given the same degree of scrutiny. And removed from the airwaves. 

I find it quite humorous and slightly ironic that tobacco ads have been yanked from the viewing public due to concerns of health risks, citing such issues as lung and throat cancer, heart disease, and birth defects in pregnant women. Now don't get me wrong, the humor is not in the diseases ... nor do I question the validity of their findings - the humor stems from the idea that banning television commercials because of health risks linked to tobacco, yet the airwaves are deluged with commercials for a plethora of pharmaceuticals and prescription drugs which have a list of possible side effects associated with these drugs that pose more health risks than anything tobacco has to offer.

Prescription drugs are hawked daily that can cause everything from the simplest allergic reactions like hives, itching, redness, nausea, trouble swallowing, and elevated blood pressure to more serious maladies that make the dangers of tobacco pale by comparison. Cancer and birth defects in unborn babies (exact claims against tobacco), and addition side effects which as the ads suggest "may cause": TB, effect the immunity system, neurological disorders and uncontrollable tremors, thoughts of suicide, internal bleeding, liver failure, urinary tract infection and kidney disease, loss of hearing or eyesight, general lethargy including muscle weakness or joint pain, a possible worsening of the disease you're being treated for, and the big one ... DEATH.

Each and every night I'm bombarded by one drug commercial after another, all followed by some fast talking spokesman rattling off a disclaimer listing possible side effects which lasts longer than the so-called benefits of the product. Seems to me the target market for pharmaceuticals should be someone with a background in medicine who is more in tuned with the medical needs of his or her patient, and not Mr. & Mrs. John Q Viewing Public. If a drug is that potentially harmful to the public maybe it shouldn't be advertised on TV. You know ... like tobacco.  

        

PappyJoe

You forgot "if you have an erection lasting more than 4 hours" in your list of side effects.

ghostsofpompeii

@PappyJoe That side effect is not a problem - it's an answer to a prayer.

jim102864

I'm stating the obvious but booze ads continue to be shown on TV, are plastered everywhere and anywhere, including sporting events where, god help the children, children can seem them.  I agree with you ghostsofpompeii, we as a country, are in full nanny state mode.  God help us if we ever have to defend our country from foreign invaders. 

PappyJoe

Let me be slightly political for a moment. The following is my opinion and does not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of anyone else...

We have long ago gone from a free country ruled by a representative democracy to a neo-totalitarian representative form of government ruled by puritanical special interest and hypocritical minority (not in a racial sense but in the sense that there are fewer members in the group than in the "mainstream" country) groups and a media controlled by a socialist democratic party. 

That's why you have small segments of this country that are vehemently opposed to tobacco use but highly in favor of drug use and why the alcohol industry is so powerful that it prevents the government from banning alcohol ads. 

motie2

@PappyJoe -- Have you visited https://velvetgloveironfist.blogspot.com/ ?  (Notwithstanding that the author is way into vaping.)

PappyJoe

@motie2 - does someone into vaping really have anything intelligent to say? I mean, the author is INTO vaping.

motie2

Johnny T. and Fafa (from http://www.GloveandBoots.com) lay down the law.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ntG9rLiEhfU

ghostsofpompeii

@motie2 I loved it!

PappyJoe

@motie2 - great find. I love it too.

motie2

@ghostsofpompeii and @PappyJoe -- Because I love you guys and I worry about your health, here's Johnny T, again:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Muz4q0Cg2f4

PappyJoe

@motie2 - That's even better. I shared it with my daughter-in-law who is a doctor and a friend of the family who is also a doctor. They are both constantly complaining about people who self diagnose.

ghostsofpompeii

That's hilarious. And absolutely right. Having grown up in Gary, Indiana where the best you could aspire to be was a worker in the Steel Mill, the majority of us are fortunate to have a high school diploma. Yet after watching a few commercials on TV or self-diagnosing ourselves after reading something on the internet we feel sufficiently informed enough to go to our doctors and tell HIM or HER what's possible wrong with us - and which drugs to prescribe.  

motie2

I never tell my doctors what to do, but neither do I automatically do whatever they say. If I had undergone the radiation the docs required after my big cancer surgery in 2000, I would be an invalid today. The doctors said the radiation would 1) damage my heart and left lung, but how much they couldn't say. 2) It would burn my espohagus, requiring twice yearly hospital visits to "stretch my esophagus." I asked why am I doing this. They said, "We think we got the whole tumor, but there were "micro-fractures in the capsule" around the tumor, and cancerous cells might have gotten away. The radiation will make sure we got everything. If you have the radiation you have an 80% chance of living five years. Without the radiation, we cannot say"  

Me: "Thanks. Bye." 

Seventeen years later, I'm still here. Doctors are not gods, and the patient must make the decisions that affect his or her health outcomes.

LostMason

Being a cigarette smoker my opinion is biased,Very biased. The big difference I see

is that with the drug companies you would still need a doctors prescription to get

the advertised products. They just want you to "be informed" as what diseases

or condition you may have. Doesn't really matter that your stressing you doctor

with you hypocondriac questions and demands.They have pills for stress too.

And as to alcohol, well even the non-smokers like their cocktails and wines.

Now I know that cigarette smoking is bad for you and I realize the risks I'm

taking. But the nannies in charge have decreed that  1) I don't make enough 

money to afford health insurance or even get tax credits/subsidies and

2) I make too much to qualify for state provided health insurance.

So if I am diagnosed with cancer, lung disease, COPD,or any of the other

aforementioned risk, I'm going to follow the example of one of my most

favorite Uncles and  die with dignity.He was diagnosed with mellenoma

and had watched as the "doctors" hacked his brother to pieces.My other uncle

had a tortuous time and his last years were spent in a nursing home begging

his wife to just let him go. So I'll smoke my tobaccos and play with chemicels.

Work with sheetrock and concrete.And when I go "they" will say "he lived 

until he died,and he got the job done."

TheBigBurleyMan

Awesome story, Motie! Cheers to the next 17!!

ghostsofpompeii

I'm so happy to hear that you've made a full recovery - with or without the radiation treatment. I fully agree with you on the fallibility of Doctors and exercising your option for a second or third opinion. As well as having an opinion of your own as to what treatment you will or will not pursue. I found myself the victim of a doctor's poor decision which resulted in doing permanent damage to my kidneys from drugs prescribed for another condition altogether. So to curtail any further damage to my kidneys I've stopped taking the drugs for the original condition that troubled me. And although that ailment was never corrected I'm still suffering from the chronic pain associated with that original condition - as well as growing concerns about the state of my kidneys and what the future has in store for me as a result. So instead of treating and solving one problem I ended up with two problems. One worse than the other. It's been my experience that a majority of doctors today are pill pushers and not problem solvers.    

motie2

@TheBigBurleyMan -- Hey, thanks. Pleased to make your acquaintance! I look forward to reading more of your thoughts.

@ghostsofpompeii -- My prayers are with you for your continued good (or at least tolerable) health. And BTW, your idea of subbing Molto Dolce for Creme Brulee in the Mrs. Hudson's formulation was/is a stroke of genius. It seems obvious, but it made the best blend I ever smoked even better!! And I've mixed up a large mason jar full of the blend. 

ghostsofpompeii

@motie2 I've got to mix up a small batch with Molto Dolce as well. My original batch is getting alarmingly low. Thankfully the Deeming Regulations should not effect any of the Sutliff blends in the mixture. But I'm not taking any chances. Glad you found a blend you truly enjoy. And happy to be part of it.

motie2

Health claims?

and a repost: 

https://www.pipehub.com/blog/post/pipe-smoking-could-have-positive-benefits-to-the-health-of-your-body---mind

mfresa

The latest from Big Brother: They still insist on lumping pipe tobacco in with cigarettes:

http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2017-07-28/tobacco-stocks-are-getting-smoked