A quick reminder that The Alan Titchmarsh Show, which I described HERE, is being broadcast this afternoon on ITV1 from 3.00pm. The debate about the tobacco display ban will, I think, be in part three of the show.
You can also watch it on ITV Player HERE.
Friday, November 6, 2009
Reader Comments (32)
How can four onto one be a balanced debate?
Well done Simon, it seemed like there was a reasonable amount of support for you in the audience. Very one-sided but, to be fair to Titchmarsh, he let you have a good say. But there was never going to be enough time to rebut all those junk stats.
Arnott came across as a sourpuss and Jaci Stephens came across as a crank (is there a display ban in France? - I didn't think so).
I have just seen the debate and I thought your performance was 8/10, the only thing that that you should of done was challenge McKenzie on 10% heart attack increases.
My first thought was that Deborah Arnott has let herself go a bit, she must have arrived on her broomstick.
You made your point well in that display bans do not lead to decreases in youth smoking. Your whole point was well received and you got a warm round of applause from the audience.
Good points on smoking rooms. sweets and alcohol and is was good to see a bit of passion and aggression too.
I appreciate that time is limited and yiu can't say everything, but ther good news if the audience is a cross section of the British public then they are fed up of the nanny and bully too.
All in all a very good afternoons work, well done.
Yes, very well done Simon. It was hardly a fair fight but you kept your end up well and very forcefully. As Dave says, it's a pity you didn't get a chance to rebut the 10% nonsense from McKenzie, and for my own part I hoped you were going knock down Jaci Stephen's whine about addiction by saying "How did Kelvin manage to give up smoking then?" - but all in all you did as well as you could possibly have done given the format and the time you were allowed.
The pity of it, really, is that the majority of viewers will undoubtedly take on trust the claptrap spouted by the three antismokers - but it was good to hear a dissenting voice in there for once.
As for Dave's remark about Arnott, it made me wish someone could have said to her "You do know Halloween was last week, don't you?"
Simon -
Once again, many thanks for your help in putting the RATIONAL side of the argument - even though you DID miss the '10% reduction-in-heart-attack' myth.
Never mind.
That's the first time I've seen La Passionara Arnott in the flesh, and she's even more gruesomely pushy than even I'd imagined (and I have a vivid imagination).
And how DARE she bring up FOREST's funding again ? Who else SHOULD be funding it - Kelloggs ?
Arnott also (within a few seconds) took the opportunity of stating that "Over 100,000 smokers die each year..........."
Yes, Deborah - from MANY DIFFERENT causes, you daft bint !
Sorry, Dear, - but that's a TOTALLY meaningless statistic (but GREAT propaganda to use before an audience).
Each year, over 500,000 die.
Which must mean that 400,000 are NON-Smokers.
Using Arnott's schoolgirl argument, you COULD say that therefore:
Non-smokers are FOUR times more likely to die in any given year than smokers, and therefore:
Non-smoking MUST be harmful.
That argument would be tosh, of course.
So is hers.
And politicians listen to THIS drivel before criminalising us ?
IMHO, Alan T was far too soft on the Three Stooges.
God, but I DO admire your patience, though......
I was annoyed at Arnott's comment about Forest's funding as well - after all, it's not a secret and nothing is hidden. On the other hand, not many people are conversant with how ASH is funded - perhaps it should be more widely known.
Dave A. We ought to test The 'Abhorrent Toad' (anagram) to see if she is a witch. Throw her into a river to see if she can swim. If she does, that will prove that she is a witch and should burned at the stake.
I didn't see it (don't have a TV), but from what I've heard about it, it might have been another case of Nick Griffin on Question Time, after which most of the comments I read here and there were about how the awful panel had ganged up on him. People tend to side with the underdog.
Simon,
I don't know why you should have had to clear up the confusion about the pretended 10% fall in heart attacks in any case.
Clearly, Deborah must have missed ASH UKs' ASH Daily News for 15 September 2009 on the subject , otherwise I am sure she would have corrected poor Kelvin. Mind you, Kelvins dads Doctor failed to point out that giving up smoking is a significant risk factor for high blood pressure after as little as one year of quitting, it must of slipped his mind. Didn't catch what Jaci Stephen's smoking relations' smoking related disease was but I am sure that if this person had never smoked, it would probably be because the smoking ban did not come soon enough - all cryptogenic diseases are caused by smoking and passive smoking (it's a scientific fact). Although, Jaci has made me think that there is little point in me voting in the next election because an "addict" such as myself, by her logic, is not capable of making sensible choices. I think I shall send my voter registration form to Jaci so she can vote for poor addicted me.
Simon, sorry , after my facetious rant, I forgot to say well done!
Fredrik -
Good point about Kelvin's Dad ('erewegoagain).
It's amazing how many people of my acquaintance seem to suffer heart attacks shortly AFTER giving up smoking.
As a complete ignoramus on this particular aspect of the subject, I would nonetheless have assumed that after a certain period the body tends to 'adapt' in some way to one's smoking 'addiction', and so any sudden withdrawal of that stimulus COULD be just as dangerous as its continuation.
Surely some 'research' MUST have been done by now to confirm (or confound) this idea ?
Ah, but that would be 'sending the wrong message'.
I KEEP forgetting something that Arnott's little party piece confirmed: this ain't (really) Science - it's Politics, pure and simple........
"We ought to test The 'Abhorrent Toad' (anagram) to see if she is a witch. Throw her into a river to see if she can swim. If she does, that will prove that she is a witch and should burned at the stake."
Chas, that was neat. A bit like Big Brother versus Ssmokers - 'Heads I win; tails you lose.'
Congratulations, Simon. Considering the constraints you were under, from the freezing dressing room and long wait to the unexpected addition of Jacqui and the clear antagonism of Titchmarsh, you had very little time to do more than stick to topic. You did this very well indeed - and the audience showed their approval.
Titchmarsh did not give you time to discuss any of the lying allegations in detail but gave the rest plenty of time to make them. He gave you no last word.
You should get the sympathy vote from both audience and viewers. I'll not watch the Titchmarsh show again; he's lost all semblance of impartiality.
I'd like to endorse the comments above regarding Kelvin's father and add that the black specks he coughed up after stopping smoking were not the lungs cleansing themselves but quite the reverse. [See F2C Forum in the Lounge Bar topic "Benefits of Smoking".].The permanent muceous lining created by smoking catches pollutants as they are breathed in. These are then neutralised and coughed up as part of the white muceous of "Smokers' Cough". Far from the lungs healing themselves when suddenly deprived of nicotine, they have this protection removed. The results are there in an ex-smoker's cough. Hence the onset of many diseases previously held at bay. In the olden days when smoking was not an issue and took place everywhere, even non-smokers benefited from this immunity. For those who really didn't like smoking, as with those who don't like meat eating, there were always separate areas provided for them.
Once again, well done Simon, to have achieved well the little you were able to achieve, None of us here would have stood a chance.
Normally,as I live in France, I just look in and enjoy the comments on Simon's posts. However, I would like to confirm Chris' doubts about the claim made by Jaci Stephens about a display ban in France. There isn't one! The tobaconnists (buralists) would be up in arms.Also, if anyone wants info on how the ban is going here (second most draconian in Europe after the UK-in principle at least!!), I'd be happy to oblige.
Also, if anyone wants info on how the ban is going here...
Yes. I'd like to know how the French ban is being observed. I keep reading contradictory reports. As best I can make out the ban is observed in cities like Paris, but not much outside them. What's your experience? And are you living in town/city or countryside?
idlex
You're right in thinking the situation is patchy in France.It's also worth mentioning that the regulations on covered, outside areas is (very) slightly more generous. It's amazing though what an extra side can do for comfort!So by and large the ban is observed, except,I'm sure, in some more off-track places (but sure that's the same in UK!). Recently, in Paris, I had no problem finding restaurants with comfortable, heated terraces( they're normally full).What I have noticed, however, is that the some bars are now beginning to push the law to its limit, either totally enclosing their terraces or, for smaller bars, putting their smokers' table just inside the entrance. In the absence of anti-smoking police they'll push things further and further, bit by bit-the French way.
Overall, few are blatantly flouting the law in Paris or anywhere else. I live down on the Mediterranean coast (it is raining at the moment!!) and it was amazing how bars/restaurants made efforts to accomodate smokers with comfortable outside areas or by opening all windows in their establishments to create the sense of an open space.So, the way over here seems to be to chip away at the regulations and, clearly, do everything possible to welcome smokers.Hope this answers your questions.
Well.........I tried to watch the Alan T show, but I could not skip the crap. So, I gave up - which is a pity.
But this thread has given me an idea.
I ask myself, what is wrong with us enjoying ourselves? What right do the healthists have to stop us enjoying ourselves? Doctor this or Professor that can say whatever they want about the harmfulness of our pleasures, but they have no right to deny us them.
I do not think that the healthists have an answer to this argument. They can bluster until they are blue in the face, but they cannot deny us our right to enjoy ourselves.
There are obvious ifs and buts - what about hard drugs? The answer is that hard drugs lead to serious crime. That is why hard drugs are banned; not because, in themselves. they are harmful to health.
Junican -
Re:
"hard drugs lead to serious crime."
And WHY ?
At the risk of being controversially obvious, there are essentially only TWO reasons:
a) Because they are highly addictive., and
b) Because they are ILLEGAL - which has the effect of making them hideously EXPENSIVE.
It may also be the case that - among certain sections of the population, at any rate - the ciminalisation of 'hard drugs' merely adds to their allure (but we'll let that one pass).
If (say) heroin were FREELY available to all registered addicts, what need would there be to mug old ladies ?
At least we'd then know who all the addicts were, and (dare I say ?) be able to offer them sensible advice about eventual re-habilitation.
The reduction in crime - and corruption - would be enormous.
Sadly, the CIA (etc) would have to look elsewhere for a funding source to finance its illegal activities.
I could live with that.
Many addicts in fact lead otherwise perfectly normal lives.
And NO - I'm NOT advocating their use.
I detest them.
But Human Nature is Human Nature, and Facts are Facts.
(And the Law of Unintended Consequences is merciless)
Only a Fool or a Politician ignores both...........
Richard Ward,
Yes, that helps to fill out the picture a bit. The way you describe it, it almost sounds like La Resistance. And perhaps for the older generation in France, that is exactly what it is. Chipping away at the regulations sounds like a very good way of eroding them into non-existence.
This sort of spirit seems to be largely absent in Britain. My general impression of the British pub business is that they almost see themselves as being an arm of the NHS, and have been almost glad to boot smokers outside. The response of my local pub landlord to the smoking ban was to announce that he would be giving up smoking. No doubt, now that alcohol is beginning to attract the attentions of the do-gooders, the pub business will be more than happy to show drinkers the door too. And my pub landlord will probably announce that he's giving up alcohol as well as cigarettes.
The strongest resistance to smoking bans seems to be found in Germany and Holland, where the laws have been amended. Smoking bans don't seem to have lasted very long in Croatia either. The general impression I get is that they are not very well observed in eastern Europe. Is it entirely coincidental that these are countries with direct experience of Nazism, and whose older generations have vivid memories of it? Perhaps they were culturally 'inoculated' against it, and it is now showing in the resistance they are putting up. In Britain and Ireland, where there was no direct experience of Nazism, there has not been a similar inoculation, and so there isn't the same cultural resistance. The British have no experience of life under a Nazi regime (until now), and so have never developed the appropriate set of learned responses. And my pub landlord is really what the French would call a collaborator (or whatever the French for one of those is).
To whom it may concern!
The smoking ban is being observed in Ireland in a very unequal manner.
In the main cities smokers are being catered for but in pubs only as restaurants just dont do smoking.
In rural Ireland pubs have been and still are being decimated, because they are mostly family run and cannot afford to cater for smokers, especially when you factor in crippling insurance costs and the drink/driving ban and the fact that most country people do not feel comfortable to sit outside pubs.
Most pubs in rural areas now only open at weekends or else 7pm or 9pm on weekdays.
This has been responsible for the breakup of rural communities and an increase in suicides.
I admire and envy the French the way they give the finger to authority and end up doing their own thing.
Martin V. Heroin users were at one time able to get a prescription for clean heroin. This was stopped, then the real problems began.
Most pubs in rural areas now only open at weekends or else 7pm or 9pm on weekdays.
This has been responsible for the breakup of rural communities and an increase in suicides.
Thanks for that glimpse of Irish life, Ann.
Ann (et al) -
Yep - can't wait for the 'review' in 2010 - telling us all what a GREAT SUCCESS the Ban has been.
And what a fool Prime Minister Cameron would be to thumb his nose at 'success'.
Especially since it 'helped' Himself in the Great Struggle.
With a little bit of 'Do it for the Children, Darling' nagging from Wifey, one imagines.
Can't wait.
As for Poor Old Ireland, it looks like I shan't be visiting Dick Mac's Bar again - or any of the other splendid oases along the coast from Dublin to Galway.
Does the Fiddler go outside to roll his own now (the Guinness will still be waiting) ?
Was THIS what the Easter Rising was for: the 'freedom' to do what you're told.............?
"The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."
Show us the way to Paradise, Deborah. We're all behind you.
A long way..................
Unfortunately I agree 100% Martin.
My life won't change irrespective of which party comes in - I have no money, just enough to pay the bills and feed my family; I just live the best I can.
Seeing as the tories haven't said anything about allowing me to socialise in a safe and comfortable environment again, the only thing that has really affected me under this NuLab regime, then why should I vote for them?
They're just the same as NuLab to me if they refuse to address the issue.
I've had enough of it, and so have many others.
There's no way that I'm facing another winter outside in the elements, fighting off the hoodies and perverts in the dark. I'm too old and too tired to do it anymore. The tories can ignore the millions of smokers if they choose, that is their choice.
I will make my choice at the ballot box. I couldn't give two-hoots anymore about who would be best to run the country. The country is no longer the country that I knew and loved.
It's a very sad situation and I pity whoever takes over from this lot.
Martin V, you have put the current state of Ireland in a nutshell when you said "the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity".
I could'nt have put it better myself.
Tourism was down 20% this year, tho the official figure given was 10%.
And to make sure tourists keep away in future and help close down more rural pubs, they have just brought in a new law reducing the drink driving limit to 50ml.
Meanwhile 33% of us wonder what the war of independence was all about!
To Ann and Maria and everyone else on here. I agree with all of you, but what I can't understand is why?
Why are they doing this to the people of Ireland, or England, or anywhere else in the UK come to that?
No one gains and so many people lose out. Where is the sense and plans behind it all?
Martin V, you have put the current state of Ireland in a nutshell when you said "the best lack all conviction, while the worst are full of passionate intensity". I could'nt have put it better myself.
I'm sure that Martin V would be the first to point out that those are the words of the famous Irish poet W.B.Yeats in his famous poem The Second Coming:
Turning and turning in the widening gyre
The falcon cannot hear the falconer;
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.
The Second Coming! Hardly are those words out
When a vast image out of Spiritus Mundi
Troubles my sight: a waste of desert sand;
A shape with lion body and the head of a man,
A gaze blank and pitiless as the sun,
Is moving its slow thighs, while all about it
Wind shadows of the indignant desert birds.
The darkness drops again but now I know
That twenty centuries of stony sleep
Were vexed to nightmare by a rocking cradle,
And what rough beast, its hour come round at last,
Slouches towards Bethlehem to be born?
I too am at a loss of the sense and plans behind it all, when all govts now sing from the same hymn sheet its not for us voting fodder to question I guess.
Looks to me they're copying the Stalin model, tho the people under that regime could at least smoke indoors.
I have to laugh at all the hype and bullshit about the anniversary and resultant liberation after the fall of the Berlin wall.
When all we're doing is knocking one wall to build another under a new title, called Brussels.
Ann and Idlex -
Yes, the spirit of Yeats lives on in his poetry.
But, as an equally passionate Englishman (and I'll debate with ANYBODY the ludicrous myth that we are NOT a passionate race), I feel incredibly saddened that the Irish - of ALL people - should have allowed themselves to be so cowed and intimidated by such a small battalion of mean-spirited know-alls.
I often wonder whether the Banners of this World aren't compensating for something MISSING in their own, sorry little lives.
I like to play this game of imagining them when they were young: the Ugly Girl that no-one wanted to be friends with (and who couldn't get a boyfriend), the Fat Ginger-Haired boy that no-one took seriously, the Class Swot (who was never as bright as he thought) who attracted one too many requests to 'shut up !', the insistent 'Christian' who knows nothing of True Christianity, but nonetheless feels compelled (and qualified) to Save The World etc etc..................
You know the sort of thing.
One day, THEY will show everybody..........
It's a thought, anyway.
Martin, I'm still reeling the way the irish, of all people, adoted the pc mindset so readily.
It was like a bolt out of the blue for old timers like myself who never really believed that the smoking ban would go beyond office and shop buildings or public transport.
Our lifestyle was changed overnight when everyone just seemed to accept 'its the law now and nothing can be done about it'.
They couldnt wait to become 'europeans' and adopted millionaire lifestyles, gave up the fags for bottles of evian water and guinness for lattes. They wanted to live forever.
It was like everyone in the country had plugged themselves into a brainwashing machine and you were left feeling like an alien.
The reason for all this was greed and false money promoted by our wannabe inept PM who was only a corrupt chancer whose only ambition was to be considered an equal to the bigger world players, who in turn just used him and his golden circle friends to bring in the bans.
In only takes one bad apple.
But in fact he was the second bad apple in the same political party we have been stuck with for the past 20years.
P.S. Big red face about my comment 'I could'nt have put it better myself'.
Ann -
No need for red face.
He's very good, though, isn't he - that Mr Yeats ?
He'd have a job fitting in now, though............
Could not find a suitable section so I written here, how to become a moderator for your forum, that need for this?