I'm not claiming it is, or isn't, but hear me out here. Tobacco usage started tapering off, and all of the supposed "research" about it causing cancer began coming out roughly the same time Rockefeller took over the the medical industry and started pushing out established medicinal principles and knowledge. Fast forward a little bit, and Big Tobacco starts messing with the cigarette recipes to increase profit margins. They stopped using pure tobacco and started mixing it with various additives that today are known to cause cancer. This then spread to other "lesser" forms of tobacco. Chew, snuff, dip, etc.
The two outliers here, are Cigars and Pipes. Both tend to be "higher class/quality", rarely if ever have additives and have remained "pure". In doing so, several studies (Which you can easily find with a quick search), have shown that smoking up to two average sized cigars results in an absurdly small increase in chances of developing cancer of any kind.
On the other hand, nicotine, the main "ingredient" in tobacco products, actually has quite a few health benefits if used in moderation. Increased neural functions, improved memory, lowered chance of Dementia, increased blood flow (which promotes hair growth, muscle growth, etc.), etc. etc.
The point I'm trying to make here, is what if tobacco isn't bad for you in and of itself. Rather, it's all the crap the cabal companies stuff into their products to increase profits. If true, this is kind of like the soy thing. Pushing the populace into accepting some new "standard belief" that actually works against them and then engineering the results they want to "prove their point". Think about it? How often did you hear about tobacco linked cancer before the 40's and 50's? The Native Americans used tobacco in spiritual rituals for how many thousands of years with little to no negative side effects?
And then there's examples like Winston Churchill. Guys who chain smoked 10+ cigars a day, never had cancer, or so much as a cough, and lived into their 90s.
I'm curious what everyone's thoughts are on this topic.
That are pushing vaping which is all synthetic. Tobacco had medicinal uses but we must question everything the so-called medical community says.
The problem with that is that, in my research at least, they've basically vilified vaping. The omnibus stimulus bill they passed in 2020, more or less tried to kill the vaping industry with a few tack ons that changed the regulation around shipping and whatnot in the vape industry. At the same time, they keep pushing for legalization of weed, which you have to smoke obviously.
I'm more or less convinced that this is part of their centuries long scheme to dumb down the population. Especially when you consider that vaping basically has all the benefits of smoking, including a unique benefit that can help people with congestion based ailments, and none of the drawbacks of smoking or other forms of tobacco use.
I know this subject well. Vaping, like gum, uses nicotine derived from tobacco and, like gum, does not carry any risk of cancer. Nicotine's potential for harm lies solely with children and pregnant women as it appears to negatively affect the health of the developing brain. The risk of cancer from tobacco smoke is small but existent, the harm (cancer, emphysema, COPD, etc.) and addictiveness of smoking is primarily from the intentional additives. Cancer is often the result of doing something (anything) a lot and the additives especially mean there aren't many 'occasional' smokers. Unenhanced tobacco is as addictive as soda, but with additives it's worse than crack.
They did vilify vaping. They've listed it as a regulated tobacco product no matter where the nicotine is derived from (ie: tomatoes), and even if there is no nicotine in the liquid. Eliquid is vegetable glycerine (vaporized in ventilators and hospital air systems), flavoring (vaporized when baking a cake), and typically nicotine. Remove the nicotine entirely and the FDA still calls it a regulated tobacco product. If you flavor the VG in your ventilator, you're an unlicensed eliquid manufacturer. Vaping is harmless, and effective to defeat smoking. It works, so it had to die.
The Tobacco Master Settlement between gov't and the states says that citizens may not sue tobacco companies, but tobacco companies will pay the states yearly to allow tobacco (smoking) use. Then, the states will have to deal with the citizens who get sick and die from smoking. They don't; instead, this money is spent on bonuses and projects. Most states have taken out loans based on future Master Settlement funds to get cash now. Payments are based on the number of smokers, so the states themselves cannot allow smoking to stop. They can't afford to suddenly have fewer smokers - the money is already spent, years in advance. The governments killed vaping to keep people smoking, to continue to prosper financially off of Big Tobacco's mass murder. It's good for SSI, too; because people die. The CDC, AMA, AHA, FDA are all complicit. You see ads now to stop vaping, but they're pretty quiet about stopping smoking.
Props to ghostsage for all of the great vape info. Helps confirm, to me, that vaping is much better for you than we're being lead on about. From research I did about 4-5 years ago along with talking to an old co-worker who was big into vaping. Big Tobacco definitely wants to control the industry because we can't have a cheap, healthy alternative that circumvents the elites slow-killing of the population.
This thread and the weed thread from earlier today were nice breaks from the usual GAW discussion topics.
Interesting. As you point out we have to analyze why they push a narrative regarding our health.It may be to destroy our health, to make them rich or some other sinister motive.
NCSWIC