November 21, 2012

The "Healthy" Are A Drain On The NHS

So the next time the righteous lecture smokers and eaters, they might just want to shut the fuck up.

This piece was inspired by our blogmate The Long Rider as he rightly fires a broadside at no-mark Katie Hopkins. Who, incidentally, is another moron in a long line of morons spouting shite.

I know pretty much everything there is to know about tobacco. From seed to smoke. I wish I didn't, but there you go. I spent many years reading study after study and I have yet to lose the scientific argument. With anyone. I know that almost everything you read about smoking/second hand smoke in the MSM is a lie. The lies are sponsored by Big Pharma and they are repeated, endlessly, by those with a vested interest or by those who have the IQ of a chair leg. Like I said, morons.

How about some actual facts?

Read these facts, and be amazed:

Lifetime healthcare costs for the "healthy"-£225,000

Lifetime healthcare costs for the obese-£201,000

Lifetime healthcare costs for smokers-£177,000

So there you have it.


1. Forbes

2. Science Daily

3. Ausmed

Some more numbers:

  • Consumer spending on tobacco products in 2010 amounted to an estimated £14 billion, around 90% of this on cigarettes.
  • Tax revenue from tobacco in 2011/12 amounted to £12.1 billion – £9.5 billion in excise duty plus £2.6 billion in VAT.
  • The total tax burden (excise duty plus VAT) accounts for 88% of the price of the cheapest cigarettes on sale in the UK.


Tobacco Manufacturers Association

And before you shout "Tobacco shill!", know this: both sides lie. Big Tobacco tells lies. Big Pharma tells lies.  Those in the pay of Big Pharma tell the most spectacular lies. I do not know anyone in the pay of Big Tobacco and believe me, I've looked.

Consider these facts as well:

Tobacco has been in continual use for over 8,000 years. Traces of tobacco (and cocaine) have been found in Egyptian pyramids dating back 6,000 years before the birth of Christ. Tobacco is well known for it's medicinal qualities, and it even protects against many cancers.

Nicotine protects YOU every day from a nasty lung disease called Pellagra. A great many foodstuffs contain Niacin and this prevents the disease. Look at the ingredients in bread, in your morning cereal and even in marmite. Naturally, the puritans did not like people to know that they were eating foods containing nicotine so they changed the name to nicotinic acid, but it was still too close to the truth so they called it Niacin. It still bothered some so they called it Vitamin B-3. Now respectable, it is added to everyone's daily diet.

Need a source or two?

Health Conscious

Live Strong

Lung cancer was a rarity until 1910-1930. It was almost unheard of. But oddly, with the arrival of the mass produced internal combustion engine-also around 1910-1930-lung disease began to spring up in huge numbers wherever these motor vehicles were sold in large numbers. I know, I know. Never confuse correlation with causation. But it is mighty fucking coincidental, is it not?

For decades tobacco has been the bad guy. It is blamed for countless deaths around the world and in the meantime my own industry, Big Oil, got away scot free. They must have been cock-a-hoop for the last hundred years or so as bent scientists and lazy journalists looked the other way.

If you doubt anything I say here, forget the science, forget the morality, forget the games these industries play and simply follow the money. If you dig a little and you are not amazed, dig deeper.

But whatever you do, do not blindly believe everything you read in the MSM.



analiensaturn said...

Excellent broadside there capt

Jay said...

Fine post, sir.

The MSM is our greatest enemy of all, I believe. Without the media, the lies told by anyone and everyone would not be spread so efficiently.

I believe in a free press, though. I believe in the right to a biased press, so long as the bias is clearly stated.

I do not believe in deliberate misleading by omission or flat-out deception in the press. It would be ideal if any of these so-called journos would actually do their fucking jobs and fact check any info they received rather than just parroting any ol' cause's propaganda.

I hate the press. But it's always been exactly like this, since its inception. The press itself is a propaganda tool used by those who seek to influence public opinion.

Captain Ranty said...

Thanks lads.

I think we have been betrayed mostly by the press. Journalists live in a "cut & paste" world where every stone goes unturned.

They churn out shite for an uncritical readership and it is most disappointing.

The scientists are no better. They will take grant money from pretty much anyone and their first question is usually "What do you want this study to say?".

And they wonder why they do not garner instant respect any more.


Jay said...

If by "betrayed" you mean that the press has been ramming a 75-foot barb-wired flagpole up our arse without any lube or the courtesy of a reach-around, particularly over the last 50 years ... then yeah, I agree with you.

karlos said...

Great post Captain.

nisakiman said...

"Lung cancer was a rarity until 1910-1930. It was almost unheard of. But oddly, with the arrival of the mass produced internal combustion engine-also around 1910-1930-lung disease began to spring up in huge numbers wherever these motor vehicles were sold in large numbers. I know, I know. Never confuse correlation with causation. But it is mighty fucking coincidental, is it not?"

It has also been noted that there are demonstrably higher incidences of LC in urban areas and along motorway corridors, and that garage attendants and long-distance truck drivers are known to be more prone to LC.

But hey, let's not allow serious research to get in the way of blaming every disease known to man on smoking. That would spoil it all for the anti-tobacco zealots. Heaven forbid, they might even have to go out and get proper jobs! Perish the thought...

Noggin the Nog said...

I've personally known 3 men which died of lung cancer and none of them smoked.

The oldest man I ever knew personally was a 96 year old who smoked all his life from the age of 12. Died of Alzeimer's.

Captain Ranty said...


I know one lady who contracted LC. She had quit smoking some 30 years before the LC made an appearance. Two other cases (not known to me personally) were of older men (in their 80's) who contracted LC. Neither had ever smoked in their lives.

None of the thousands of smokers I know (or got to know through various forums) have (so far) contracted LC.

It is still a rare disease, relatively speaking.


yardarm said...

Kate Hopkins is a useless gobshite whose only talent is for self promotion and getting her knickers off. No doubt she still wants the NHS to treat STD cases. She was a graduate of the convent school in Barnstaple which produced some of the most accomplished cock holsters around here.

Anonymous said...

Niacin (C6NH5O2) and Nicotine (C10H14N2) are different chemical compounds, with different behaviours. (The digits are supposed to be subscripts, and indicate how many of the marked atom are present).

It seems that plant's use Niacin as one of the precursors in the production of Nicotine; so maybe while puffing on your fags, you're receiving both?

I seem to recall a suggestion that the increase in lung cancer may be down to fine particulates in diesel exhaust fumes.


bollixed said...

I would recommend readers of this blog go get hold of a book called 'Smokescreens' which is about as fair an investigation into the dreaded tobacco as it gets. It is a rivetting read whether you partake or not but I would draw your attention to your claim about the rise in lung cancer. If you superimpose that on a graph of tubercolosis diagnosis it is clear that what has been happening over the past is an increase in the proper diagnosis of lung cancer rather than confusing it with TB.
Added to my own professional experience there is a mountain of evidence that what is really happening with smoking is that it is a really useful scapegoat for a whole raft of problems that the doctors can't diagnose or big gubmint and the corporations want to avoid talking about because it would bury them in class actions.
Ask any coroner if he can tell the difference between a dead smoker and a non-smoker on the slab without blood tests. And are you also aware that according to the WHO stats a pipe smoker is statistically likely to live longer than a non-smoker.
The whole thing is a can of worms created by puritans and needs a proper gubmint enquiry to get somewhere near the truth. No profit in the truth though......

Anonymous said...

Science Daily:"mathematical model","suggests","might"...
I'd leave that one out,Mr.Ranty.