Monday, March 05, 2007
The True "White Lies"
My first real editor always said that, someday, he wanted to start a publication called "True Lies." He never did, but there are plenty of true lies out there to fill a newspaper or magazine now.
The biggest ones are about the effects of second-hand smoke, put forth by anti-smoking true believers like WhiteLies.tv. You've seen the ads, I'm sure, that make second-hand smoke look like the greatest, most gruesome hazard to your health since Adolph Hitler.
And they make it appear that they have the science behind them to make their claims. Problem is, they don't. All they have are those cursed true lies (ironic, coming from a Web site that calls itself "WhiteLies").
It turns out that the WhiteLiars are bigger liars than the tobacco companies. Their "scientific" claims presumably are based on the EPA "study" of the effects of second-hand smoke, which concluded that it was the Second Coming of the black plague.
Trouble is, the EPA "research" has been thoroughly debunked and declared scienticially invalid by no less than a federal court, which found that the EPA had reached its conclusion before actually doing its research. Hardly scientific or truthful, I'd say.
The fact is that the most comprehensive -- and scientifically valid -- studies have reached very different conclusions. They -- the one from the American Cancer Society, another from a scientific group in Germany, one more in California -- all concluded that there is no significant health hazard from second-hand smoke.
So, how the hell did that happen? Easy. It's just like the sides in the global warming debate. They don't go into their wars of words with the science that is truthful, just with the science that is convenient to their argument. The convenient untruths, if you will.
So that is the basis on which states like mine, Indiana, come up with terrible legislation like raising the tax on cigarettes by fifty cents a pack and banning smoking in public places. The legislators swear they are looking out for our welfare and trying to beat back this beast of the modern day. Their basis for all this is bogus science, plus the misguided idea that they can somehow "encourage" smokers to quit smoking this way. Obviously, they don't know very much about addictions and addicts.
So what do they know? Only True Lies.
Somewhere, if there truly is an after-life (the science isn't in on that one), my old editor must be smiling from ear-to-ear.
The biggest ones are about the effects of second-hand smoke, put forth by anti-smoking true believers like WhiteLies.tv. You've seen the ads, I'm sure, that make second-hand smoke look like the greatest, most gruesome hazard to your health since Adolph Hitler.
And they make it appear that they have the science behind them to make their claims. Problem is, they don't. All they have are those cursed true lies (ironic, coming from a Web site that calls itself "WhiteLies").
It turns out that the WhiteLiars are bigger liars than the tobacco companies. Their "scientific" claims presumably are based on the EPA "study" of the effects of second-hand smoke, which concluded that it was the Second Coming of the black plague.
Trouble is, the EPA "research" has been thoroughly debunked and declared scienticially invalid by no less than a federal court, which found that the EPA had reached its conclusion before actually doing its research. Hardly scientific or truthful, I'd say.
The fact is that the most comprehensive -- and scientifically valid -- studies have reached very different conclusions. They -- the one from the American Cancer Society, another from a scientific group in Germany, one more in California -- all concluded that there is no significant health hazard from second-hand smoke.
So, how the hell did that happen? Easy. It's just like the sides in the global warming debate. They don't go into their wars of words with the science that is truthful, just with the science that is convenient to their argument. The convenient untruths, if you will.
So that is the basis on which states like mine, Indiana, come up with terrible legislation like raising the tax on cigarettes by fifty cents a pack and banning smoking in public places. The legislators swear they are looking out for our welfare and trying to beat back this beast of the modern day. Their basis for all this is bogus science, plus the misguided idea that they can somehow "encourage" smokers to quit smoking this way. Obviously, they don't know very much about addictions and addicts.
So what do they know? Only True Lies.
Somewhere, if there truly is an after-life (the science isn't in on that one), my old editor must be smiling from ear-to-ear.
