Put tobacco on school curriculum, say NICE
Wednesday, February 24, 2010 Those terribly nice people at the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence have come up a terrific wheeze to educate our children on the perils of tobacco. According to a journalist who contacted me for a response, "They want to put information about tobacco across a wide range of subjects - as part of a drive to prevent young people from becoming smokers.
"They're saying that when people start smoking at a young age it becomes harder for them to give up in later life - so early intervention is best. They're suggesting that as well as lessons about the physical impact of smoking that tobacco should be looked at in subjects such as citizenship and media studies."
After a bit of thought, I sent the following (rather long) quote:
"It's important that young people are well educated about the risks of smoking, but if tobacco is featured across a range of subjects there is a real danger of warning fatigue. No-one likes to be nagged, least of all teenagers, and this could be counter-productive.
"It's important that smoking is seen in its social and historical context. Lessons about the health risks should be accompanied by lessons about the history of smoking, which I'm sure would interest a great many students, and changing social attitudes towards tobacco.
"If they include tobacco in subjects such as citizenship and media studies, I sincerely hope that they discuss issues such as freedom of choice, personal responsibility and the role of government in changing people's behaviour. There are strong arguments on both sides of the debate and older children should be given the opportunity to make up their own minds and draw their own conclusions.
"The majority of teenage children are not stupid and they know when they are being fed a diet of one-sided propaganda. Schools must stick to the facts and give children a broad education on the issues surrounding tobacco. Above all, they should encourage children to think for themselves so when they become adults they can make a proper, informed choice about tobacco and other issues."
The BBC has the story HERE. It includes a shorter version of the quote above.
Reader Comments (18)
Since when has it been the job of the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence, to tell us how to educate our children?
Stick posters up in doctor's surgeries if they must, or in hospital wards, but please leave teaching to teachers.
Is NICE also calling for children to be educated in the perils of walking through our clogged up city streets?
the perils of tobacco
The tobacco companies must be rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of tobacco lessons. As this article here says that teenagers who did not have sex education lessons were less likely to be gymslip mothers. Educating teenagers in the "evils" of smoking will just make them curious to try.
"But research funded by the Department of Health shows that young women who attended the programme, at a cost of £2,500 each, were 'significantly' more likely to become pregnant than those on other youth programmes who were not given contraception and sex advice."
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1198228/6m-drive-cut-teen-pregnancies-sees-DOUBLE.html#ixzz0gTgXQCKY
All those kids will be wanting a fag after sex
Ah lovely,Miss telling the kiddies not to do something.
Worked a treat that approach ,with teenage pregnancies, did'nt it
Nice to see on my local bus station more kids than ever before openly having a gasp or two.
Keep up the good work ,Miss
But Chas theyll tell them not to have sex either.
Todays Lesson.
How to subjugate an entire population.
One.
Single out a group whos activity may be frowned upon by a majority then the majority will just look on and do nothing.
Two
Legislate against this group to show you mean business and can get away, with it, this also keeps the other prolateriate in line as they see what happens when you break the "dictate".
Three
Try to make them look inferior dehumanise them.
utterly break any spirit they have.
Four
Move on to the next minority and repeat steps One Two and Three.
Lesson in Subjugation and control is now over.
Who's next then ?
And all done with a NICE smile !
Just a random thought:
Is it possible that one of the reasons that people STILL find it so hard to believe that Fascism is just around the corner is the fact that the IMAGE that term tends to conjure up derives from the rather dated one of the Thirties ?
If you care to look at any of that old newsreel footage - with the military march-pasts, the torchlight parades, the theatrical ranting on the podium etc et - then ONE very obvious quality stands out: the almost oppressive MASCULINITY of it all.
Nobody would buy THAT product today.
Not with that packaging, at any rate.
Society has moved as far beyond such unsophisticated crudities as it has beyond carbolic soap and shiny loo paper.
But when you install a few hundred WOMEN (of the right sort) in certain positions of authority, you soften the Face of the Regime, and thereby render it more palatable to modern public taste. And MUCH less obviously threatening.
Hence, much less likely to provoke the Spirit of Resistance (despite all the predictable-but-ineffective grumbles of discontent).
Especially if the women in question happen to be 'mothers' (a status which some, curiously, considered sufficient qualification in itself for Roof Kelly's elevation to the office of Education Secretary).
Or - to put it another way:
A spoonful of SUGAR helps the MEDICINE go down.
NICE-ly.
As I said - just a thought.
To add to your point Martin V.
Actually most of the female Labour ministers remind me more of Alaina Chauchescu than Mary Poppins or Nanny Mcphee.
Having read the BBC article, it is not entirely clear who exactly has issued this statement, but that does not matter very much. It is reasonable to assume that the chief exec and the board of NICE have agreed.
In my opinion, this renders the members of the board and the chief exec ‘not fit for purpose’ (it is to be assumed that all members of the board agreed). The reason is that they have exceeded their remit. They are wasting their time and taxpayers’ money cogitating upon the school curriculum. They have forgotten that the school curriculum is designed to teach children facts – writing, reading, maths, science, art, PE, religion, history, geography, etc. They are trying to raise this ephemeral subject of ‘health’ to a ‘science’, which it is not.
I wonder who put them up to it? It does not matter. The whole board and the chief exec need to be removed.
I guess that Simon’s response was the best ‘sound bite’ that was appropriate at the time and that there is only so much time to compose a response, but I would personally tend to be more antagonistic in the sense that, in this particular incident, I would emphasise that teachers have enough to do without preaching ‘health propaganda’.
The beauty of being ‘Forest’ is that the organisation is not a government lackey. It has a right to be antagonistic if it wishes to be so.
Specky -
Or Rosa Klebb !
But I wasn't just referring to Parliament, of course, or the perceptions of those us In the Loop.
Most of the governance of our country these days takes place far beyond Westminster and Whitehall.
Right the way down to school level in many cases (catch 'em young - to paraphrase the Jesuits).
There are PLENTY of opportunities for an ambitious 'Mary Poppins'.
And when individual members of the Public deal with HER - or catch her smiling face on all those lovely websites - they just KNOW that there's nothing REALLY wrong with our country.
Which, I think, is the idea.
Or, at any rate, the effect....................
Junican - I think that schools stopped teaching 'facts' some time ago to make room for indoctrinating children in NuLabour's ideology.
Love the journalist's quote in Simon's post which suggests an inability to distinguish between information and propaganda...
Junican -
Re:
"teachers have enough to do without teaching ‘health propaganda’.................."
Or:
The propaganda of 'Climate Change', or
The propaganda of'Europe', or
The propaganda of 'Multiculturalism', or
The propaganda of 'Sexual Diversity', or.......
Yet - despite what you and I and millions of others regard as their PROPER function - there are thousands of teachers who not only embrace the above with enthusiasm, but who would probably be quite willing to 'teach' nothing else.
Young Kylie (or Kelly, Kirsty, Kayleigh or Kerry) may NOT be able to work out the square root of 121, or know anything about the Great Fire of London - but she CAN tell you why Homosexual Adoption is A Good Thing (and why ANYONE who opposes it is just a malignant queer-basher who was probably the victim of child-abuse, and is now 'in denial').
Even if she can't put it into readable English..........
Thats why most elite background children go private.
State schools are just fodder factories.
Any initiative at all is discouraged.
Free thought and the ability to reason and question are deliberately not developed.
Subservience and conformity are the main requirement to be shown by star pupils.
The average results from state schools are Homer and Marge Simpsons.
Then they can be fooled (milked)for the rest of their unenlightened adult lives as well.
So very sad.
Too true, Specky !
And that's the FIRST thing to change - if ever the Good Guys get in.....................
Funny how the global warming brigade have kept silent during the cold weather.
Guess they're waiting for the sun to shine!
I was standing outside Ramsgate station having my last fag before my 2 hour train journey to London when I was approached by a schoolgirl in uniform (I won't mention the school) who looked like jailbait and at least 18 who pleadingly asked me if I could spare her a cigarette. Children and teachers were pouring out of the station so I said tongue in cheek "You're too young!" She replied that she is 15! So I said if I gave her one I could get into trouble! She just walked off. So I've done my bit to stop teenagers smoking! I hasten to add I started when I was about 11.
Sylvia -
Sounds like a classic case of Entrapment.
Probably the Chief Constable in drag...........
If anyone asks you for a fag, as a first principle, refuse. Say, as I do, "I do not travel 1000 miles to buy my fags in order to supply you". It is magically effective.
But this is a response to people I know! (Obviously, I do not always refuse! But I always make the point that I am not a cigarette machine.)
If a stranger asks me for a fag, I say that fags are so expensive that I only carry with me as many as I need. By implication, I am saying, "You want to smoke. Go buy them. It is the government's fault that they are so expensive"
In a roundabout sort of way, I thus put pressure on other people to try to change the political status quo.