Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Sometimes things are not as they seem.

0 views
Skip to first unread message

HORNET@superhero.com GREEN HORNET

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 6:13:06 PM3/19/07
to
Could it be smoking in *moderation* is good for you?
It is a heretical idea, I know. But consider what was found in the Surgeon
Generals report from 1964 below.

-----
http://www.freewebtown.com/infinitethoughts/11%20cigarettes.JPG

The above link shows a chart from the "lost" Surgeon Generals 1964 report
"Cigarette Smoking and Health Characteristics".
It clearly shows moderate smokers, (11 a day and under) across the board,
having a *LOWER* percentage of chronic conditions then NON-SMOKERS.

It does show excessive smoking, having a higher percentage of chronic
conditions. So, the motto moderation in everything is very apt.

Ray Johnstone found the "lost" report, and it can be found at his site.
http://members.iinet.net.au/~ray//sr10_034acc.pdf

--
If the Authorities are telling you to do something, don't believe them
blindly.
Question Authority.


robbster

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 6:21:07 PM3/19/07
to
GREEN HORNET wrote:


> Ray Johnstone found the "lost" report, and it can be found at his site.

> http://idiots.iinet.net.au/~rayisanIdiot//MyStoopid.pdf


>
> --
> If the Authorities are telling you to do something, don't believe them
> blindly.
> Question Authority.
>
>

LOL!!! That old dog has to enlist a gullible proxy now? I see that he is
still obsessed with the fact that we are a quit smoking support group...

--

Pack a day smokers inhale one quart of tar a year into their lungs.
Robb§ter 3 years quit February 1, 2007--> you can do it too!
Visit us at: www.ciggyfree.com | Blog: www.ciggyfree.com/cigblog


HORNET@superhero.com GREEN HORNET

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 6:29:59 PM3/19/07
to
Submitted for people to consider.
Personally if I find something that doesn't add up, I question further.

"robbster" <FillOutCo...@NOSPAMCIGGYFREE.com> wrote in message
news:n1ELh.27279$yj7.24741@trnddc02...

CuckooCat

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 9:25:51 PM3/19/07
to
Instead of using an old 1964 obsolete study to justify your addiction, maybe
you should visit a cancer ward and ask people if they had smoked.
Oh wait, you don't have to do anything but type drivel on your puter for
money.
How pathetic it must be to earn your death-money from big tobacco. Your
parents must be proud.

/me waves to Robbb


"GREEN HORNET" <GREEN HOR...@superhero.com> wrote in message
news:H9ELh.9360$Um6....@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...

robbster

unread,
Mar 19, 2007, 10:04:23 PM3/19/07
to
CuckooCat wrote:
> Instead of using an old 1964 obsolete study to justify your addiction, maybe
> you should visit a cancer ward and ask people if they had smoked.
> Oh wait, you don't have to do anything but type drivel on your puter for
> money.
> How pathetic it must be to earn your death-money from big tobacco. Your
> parents must be proud.
>
> /me waves to Robbb


wavel! I lost my b!

HORNET@superhero.com GREEN HORNET

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 12:57:14 PM3/20/07
to
In that cancer ward, ask the people *how many* they smoked.
Smoke two packs a day. Unhealthy.

Cancer can't be blamed entirely on tobacco. Did you know people have gotton
cancer from the water they drink?

Saying the study is obsolete doesn't excuse the weird results they found.

Like I said. I question everything. Big Brother Media tells me something I
don't believe it blindly.
I research. Anti-smoking has holes in it.
Lots of them.

"CuckooCat" <si...@laughing.net> wrote in message
news:Q_WdnaTyjtq9pWLY...@comcast.com...

robbster

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 1:36:25 PM3/20/07
to
GREEN HORNET wrote:

> Like I said. I question everything. Big Brother Media tells me something I
> don't believe it blindly.
> I research.

I also do a tremeandous amount of research and I can't find one good
reason to fill my lungs up with toxins.
http://www.ciggyfree.com/cigblog/2007/02/17/how-your-lungs-work/

> Anti-smoking has holes in it. Lots of them.

Anti-smoking is not controlled by BIG tobacco corporations...

HORNET@superhero.com GREEN HORNET

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 5:23:39 PM3/20/07
to
Guess who supplies anti-smoking with all that money for their commercials?

Johnson and Johnson.
Why is this?
Could it be sales of the patch?

Which countries have the highest number of smokers, and also has among the
lower death rates?
Greece and Japan.
Look it up.

How can this be?
How can Greece and Japan have the highest number of smokers, yet be among
the countries that have the lower death rates?
Something is going on. Things don't add up.


Like I said. I question everything.

--
Tobacco is an organic substance. Inhaled in MODERATE AMOUNTS your organic
body simply assimilates it.
I question the "400 chemicals in tobacco". Organic tobacco can't possibly
have those chemicals, ammoniums, chlorine, etc. etc.

Native americans used tobacco medicinally and in religous ceremonies, for
thousands of years.
Look it up.

Reference back to that report in my original post from the Surgeon General.
Moderate amounts of tobacco smokers are healthier then non-smokers.
As hard as that is to imagine.

--
Question what I'm saying. Look it up.
I blindly believed the things I heard on TV and print ads.
No longer.


"robbster" <FillOutCo...@NOSPAMCIGGYFREE.com> wrote in message

news:tYULh.11582$e47.10867@trnddc05...

robbster

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 7:54:32 PM3/20/07
to
GREEN HORNET wrote:
> Guess who supplies anti-smoking with all that money for their commercials?
>
> Johnson and Johnson.
> Why is this?

Hmmmm Ciggyfree supports and works with tobaccofreekids.org (NH) and I
seriously doubt that Johnson & Johnson supports their *commercials*
since this advertisement is on a *global levels* as well as grass roots...

> Could it be sales of the patch?

?

>
> Which countries have the highest number of smokers, and also has among the
> lower death rates?
> Greece and Japan.
> Look it up.
>
> How can this be?

Diet

> How can Greece and Japan have the highest number of smokers, yet be among
> the countries that have the lower death rates?
> Something is going on. Things don't add up.
> Like I said. I question everything.

I am really not here to argue with you - though it looks like you are
making a sad attempt at it...

The facts most people are aware of. Smoking kills. You are trying to
promote a drug that kills people in a forum that supports people who
choose not to smoke.

Japan could have lower death rates due to high green tea consumption -
due to the antioxidant effect of polyphenols that green tea
contains...Greece and Japan eat a lot of alpha-linolenic acid. This
stops blood from clotting. And alpha-linolenic acid also stops the heart
from developing arrhythmia.

Over and out.

~r

Anne D.

unread,
Mar 20, 2007, 9:08:44 PM3/20/07
to

"GREEN HORNET" <GREEN HOR...@superhero.com> wrote in message
news:vhYLh.53$rO7...@newssvr25.news.prodigy.net...

> Which countries have the highest number of smokers, and also has among the
> lower death rates?
> Greece and Japan.
> Look it up.

Um...
All countries have the SAME death rate.
100%.
Dispute that.
Stoopit troll.


HORNET@superhero.com GREEN HORNET

unread,
Mar 21, 2007, 1:31:08 PM3/21/07
to
Robb, I'm not promoting anything. I've found out certain things that don't
quite add up and now I'm telling you in order to discuss.

Japan and Greece. You just answered the question.
Diet.

So, what are the facts. They are the heaviest smokers, YET through proper
diet AND smoking tobacco they are among the countries that have the oldest
people?
According to the Anti-smoking campaign, they should *not* be this healthy !
Right ?

I submit that the facts are not all there. Maybe all these americans are not
dying from tobacco, but from their Diet. (We know american food is the worst
in the world, filled with synthetic preservatives and additives). Or from
the petrochemicals in almost all products? Or from the toxicity and damage
from pollutants in our environment. Or from the Atomic testing in the
atmosphere 60 years ago. Radioactive material has a half life of 50,000
years. Or even from drinking water.

Remember, drinking water is some parts of the U.S. has heavy carcinogens in
it.
Drinking water can cause cancer.

"robbster" <FillOutCo...@NOSPAMCIGGYFREE.com> wrote in message

news:Yu_Lh.15051$O_5.8247@trnddc03...

nightlight

unread,
Mar 21, 2007, 9:28:01 PM3/21/07
to
robbster wrote:

> GREEN HORNET wrote:
>
>> Guess who supplies anti-smoking with all that money for their
>> commercials?
>>
>> Johnson and Johnson.
>> Why is this?
>
>
> Hmmmm Ciggyfree supports and works with tobaccofreekids.org (NH) and I
> seriously doubt that Johnson & Johnson supports their *commercials*
> since this advertisement is on a *global levels* as well as grass roots...

Johnson & Johnson (through its proxy foundation RWJF) created this
"grass roots" antismoking organization Tobacco-Free-Kids, along with
most other "grass roots" antismoking organizations, "patients" groups
(for cancers etc), numerous researchers churning antismoking studies,...
and it is their main funding source:

RWJF spent $70 millions to create TFK in 1996
http://www.rwjf.org/reports/grr/035929.htm?gsa=1

Example of a $14 million RWJF grant to TFK (tfk report)
http://www.data-yard.net/infocoalition/63.pdf

Or the same grant from RWJF site:
http://www.rwjf.org/portfolios/grantlist.jsp?iaid=143&page=4

Note that "Robert Wood Johnson Foundation" (RWJF) created by RWJ, who
was the grand patriarch of J&J Co:

http://www.rwjf.org/about/founder.jhtml

is a proxy for J&J Co and its interests. RWJF owns about $5.4 billions
in J&J stock and its governing board shares most of its members with J&J
board, top execs and J&J family members:

http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/2005/07/why-is-pharmaceutical-company-funding.html

And it is not at all about nicotine patches and gums, these are just the
tip of the profits iceberg:

Money Trail:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.smokers/browse_frm/thread/18ce47ecd9c15eda

Consider, for example that smoking cuts Parkinson's the risk by a factor
3, Alzheimer's by factor 2 (factor 10 for early onset) , schizophrenia
by factor 2,... All these extra tens of millions of patients require
expensive pharmaceuticals for years or decades. Add to that
antidepressants for quiting and for general population scared away from
tobacco (tobacco is a powerful and unique selective MAO B inhibitor, it
rewinds your dopamine levels, via its MAOI activity, by couple decades
toward more youthful levels by the time you are 50, see photos here:

MAO inhibiting properties of tobacco smoke
http://www.nida.nih.gov/NIDA_Notes/NNVol13N3/tobacco.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MAO_inhibitor

Other neuro-protective properties of tobacco smoke:
http://herballure.com/ubbthreads/showflat.php?Cat=&Board=UBB19&Number=15747&page=0&view=collapsed&sb=5&o=&fpart=1&vc=1#Post15747

...)

Nicotine replacement profits are a small change in comparison.

Sue

unread,
Mar 21, 2007, 9:21:32 PM3/21/07
to
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007 22:13:06 GMT, "GREEN HORNET" <GREEN
HOR...@superhero.com> wrote:

>Could it be smoking in *moderation* is good for you?
>It is a heretical idea, I know. But consider what was found in the Surgeon
>Generals report from 1964 below.
>
>-----
>http://www.freewebtown.com/infinitethoughts/11%20cigarettes.JPG
>
>The above link shows a chart from the "lost" Surgeon Generals 1964 report
>"Cigarette Smoking and Health Characteristics".
>It clearly shows moderate smokers, (11 a day and under) across the board,
>having a *LOWER* percentage of chronic conditions then NON-SMOKERS.
>
>It does show excessive smoking, having a higher percentage of chronic
>conditions. So, the motto moderation in everything is very apt.
>
>Ray Johnstone found the "lost" report, and it can be found at his site.
>http://members.iinet.net.au/~ray//sr10_034acc.pdf

OK. Now I see the original post. Again I ask...why post that here?
Nobody gives a hairy rat's ass. We quit regardless of all this. I
couldn't be a moderate smoker if my life depended on it which it did.
I was a full strength smoker.
I say to you - piffle!
Sue

robbster

unread,
Mar 21, 2007, 9:40:59 PM3/21/07
to
GREEN HORNET wrote:
<snip>

This is a quit smoking support forum - I support people who are trying
to quit smoking and not people who desire to continue smoking.

robbster

unread,
Mar 21, 2007, 10:16:08 PM3/21/07
to
nightlight wrote:

<snip>

You made your point about J&J. As long as they (J&J) continue to churn
out the fundings to assist in educating our children and swaying
legislation toward antismoking agenda then I choose to support TFK.

.

Steve and Sarah

unread,
Mar 22, 2007, 10:46:09 AM3/22/07
to

"Sue" <seb...@thegrid.net> wrote in message
news:8dm303d6h49u582g8...@4ax.com...

WOO HOO SUE!!!!
Tell it like it is :) I couldn't be a moderate smoker either in fact toward
the end of my addiction I was smoking more and more.

Steve,

--
Sarah and Steve
Octonobutts

I knocked. Several Times. You never answered.
-Opportunity


0 new messages