I am a cigarette with a life attached.
— Raymond Carver (1938 – 88)
Simon Chapman (1951)
Smoking kills 19,000 Australians a year, more than 4,000 before retirement age, more than those who die from breast, cervical and skin cancer, AIDS, suicide, alcohol and road crashes combined.
(p 192)
Globally, an estimated 4 million people die each year from tobacco-related illness, compared to 2.7 million from malaria and 2.8 million from AIDS.
After malnutrition (5.9 million in 1990) and violence and injury (5.8 million), tobacco claims more deaths than any other single cause.
(Smoke Signals, 2016, p 141)
Simon Chapman [Director of Research, School of Public Health, University of Sydney]:
[According to] internal tobacco industry documents [the price of cigarettes] is the single greatest determinant of smoking in the community. …
[They also] show that the main purpose of [cigarette additives] is to make smoking more palatable for young people.
[A] lot of work has gone [into reducing] 'throat grab' [‒ that initial coughing you get when you first start smoking.]
[Menthol] acts as a sort of a gentle local anaesthetic in the throat, which makes [smoking] easier, particularly for young women, who tend to favour menthol cigarettes …
Robert Proctor:
[Smoking] is not like drinking …
[It's] like being an alcoholic.
Only about three per cent of people who drink are addicted, whereas 80 to 90 per cent of people who smoke are addicted. …
[Smoking] is not a recreational drug …
[The] cigarette pack itself [is] the last bastion of advertising.
The cigarette pack [is] like a micro-ad …
[Cigarettes are an undifferentiated product, they're] basically all … the same.
[From a marketing viewpoint, the packaging is the] product. …
Simon Chapman (1951):
[If you] open any tobacco industry trade magazine [there is] page after page of advertisements from packaging companies, talking about how packaging is front and centre of branding …
[The package] is the centre of the advertising effort.
There's been a lot of experimental evidence by people showing young people different versions of packs and asking them which ones that they would prefer.
[They] always say that they don't like the plain-packaged ones, they want the nice looking packs …
[It's] a no-brainer.
[The] next generation of kids will grow up never having seen a packet of carcinogenic products packaged in a beautiful box.
(Plain packaging of cigarettes, ABC Rear Vision, 19 October 2011)
Would you like to know more?
E-cigarettes
Banks E, Yazidjoglou A, Brown S, Nguyen M, Martin M, Beckwith K, Daluwatta A, Campbell S & Joshy G
Among non-smokers, there is currently strong evidence that use of e-cigarettes is harmful to health overall, with multiple health harms and no health benefits identified in this population. …
There is no available evidence as to how e-cigarette use affects clinical mental-health outcomes. …
There is strong evidence that e-cigarettes increase combustible smoking uptake in non-smokers, particularly youth …
Use of e-cigarettes results in inhalation of a complex array of chemicals originating from:
- the e-liquid,
- chemical reactions in the heating coil and the device itself.
- nicotine,
- solvent carriers (propyleneglycol, ethylene glycol and glycerol),
- tobacco-specific nitrosamines,
- volatile organic compounds,
- phenolic compounds,
- flavourings,
- tobacco alkaloids,
- aldehydes,
- free radicals,
- reactive oxygen species,
- furans, and
- metals.
- cardiovascular measures, and
- brain development and functioning. …
There is conclusive evidence that:
- e-cigarettes and their constituents cause poisoning, injuries and burns and immediate toxicity through inhalation, including seizures …
- their use leads to addiction, and that
- they cause less serious adverse events, such as throat irritation and nausea.
- half of cases related to THC in conjunction with vitamin E acetate, and
- 14% in patients reporting the use of nicotine-delivering products only …
(Executive Summary, Electronic cigarettes and health outcomes: systematic review of global evidence, Report for the Australian Department of Health, National Centre for Epidemiology and Population Health, Canberra, April 2022, pp viii‒xiv, emphasis added)
Wind Turbines
There is currently no published scientific evidence to positively link wind turbines with adverse health effects. …
The evidence on shadow flicker does not support a health concern. …
[Wind] turbines of contemporary design … produce very low levels of infrasound. …
The risk of blade glint from modern wind turbines is … very low.
[The] closeness of the electrical cables counters the electromagnetic field [generated by wind turbines], as does shielding with metal armour. …
[Evidence is limited, therefore] it is recommended that relevant authorities take a precautionary approach and continue to monitor research outcomes.
(NHMRC Public Statement, July 2010)
Table 3 (Adapted): Typical A-weighted sound levels for different sources | |
|---|---|
| Activity | Sound pressure level (dBA) |
| Busy general office | 60 |
| Car travelling at 64km/h at 100m | 55 |
| Typical wind farm (at moderate wind speed 7 m/s)* | 40 ± 5 |
| Background noise in rural area at night | 30 ± 10 |
| *Based on sound level measurements taken from multiple resident locations near two Victorian wind farms, at distances 500–1,000 m from the nearest turbine. | |
(p 8)
Table 4: Examples of sources of infrasound | ||
|---|---|---|
| Natural environment | Household and industry | Human body |
| Wind Waves Waterfalls |
Air conditioning Rail traffic Power plants |
Breathing Chewing Heart beat Head movement |
Infrasound from wind farms has been found to be well below the hearing threshold of 85 dBG, and therefore inaudible, even as close as 185 m from the turbines.
(p 10)
(Wind farms, sound and health — Technical information, Victorian Department of Health, April 2013)
Would you like to know more?
Contents
Tobacco
Wind Turbines
The Nocebo Hypothesis
Wind Turbine Apocalypse
E-cigarettes
Simon Chapman (1951)
Professor of Public Health, University of Sydney.
Institute of Public Affairs (2014): Top 12 Australian all time 'opponent of freedom'.
- Wind turbine syndrome: a communicated disease, ABC Health Report, 5 February 2018.
- An ill wind, ABC Background Briefing, 26 May 2013.
Sarah Laurie: Medical Director, Waubra Foundation.
(Laurie's medical registration lapsed in 2006.)
Richard Dowell: Professor of Audiology and Speech Science, University of Melbourne.
Simon Chapman (1951):
[In 30 years of practice in public health I've never] come across anything which has remotely the same number of problems associated with it [as Wind Turbine Syndrome.]
There have been [19 reviews of the available research and none] have said that wind turbines, and specifically infrasound, are harmful to health. …
Infrasound … refers to sounds with a frequency below 20 Hz.
Infrasound above 85 dBG is generally audible, while infrasound below this level is generally inaudible. …
Below 16–20 Hz, the sensation of tone (recognisable pitch of the sound) disappears. …
The sound may become discontinuous in character and, at very high levels, may feel like pressure at the eardrums.
(Wind farms, sound and health — Technical information, Victorian Department of Health, April 2013, p 10)
Professor Simon Chapman is the lead author of a paper examining a condition known as vibroacoustic disease, which some people say causes adverse medical conditions for people living or working with 10 kilometres of wind turbines. …
The study, published in the Australian and New Zealand Journal of Public Health, examined 35 research papers on vibroacoustic disease, and found that all but one had a first author from the same research group.
Professor Chapman says the claim that wind turbines cause the disease is based on a single case study of a 12-year-old boy with memory and attention problems at school.
(Academic Simon Chapman finds no evidence that wind turbines cause vibroacoustic disease, ABC News, 5 June 2013, emphasis added)
Nina Pierpont, a New York pediatrician and wife of an anti-wind energy activist [claims in her] self-published, non-peer-reviewed book that ultra-low frequency sounds affect human health …
[These claims] are based on a very small sample of self-selected subjects with no control group for comparison. …
Simon Chapman has said that "wind turbine syndrome" is [not a recognised diagnosis in] any international disease classification system and does not appear in any title or abstract in the … US National Library of Medicine's PubMed database.
[The] term appears [to have been coined] by anti-wind farm activist groups.
(Environmental impact of wind power — Noise Annoyance, Wikipedia, 6 July 2013)
EXPLICIT CAUTIONARY NOTICE TO THOSE RESPONSIBLE FOR WIND TURBINE SITING DECISIONS
BE ADVISED that, as a result of information gathered from the Waubra Foundation’s own [unpublished] field research, and from the clinical and acoustic research available internationally, the following serious medical conditions have been identified in people living, working, or visiting within 10 km of operating wind turbine developments. …
- chronic severe sleep deprivation;
- acute hypertensive crises;
- new onset hypertension;
- heart attacks (including Tako Tsubo episodes);
- worsening control of preexisting and previously stable medical problems such as angina, hypertension (high blood pressure), diabetes, migraines, tinnitus, depression, and post traumatic stress disorder;
- severe depression, with suicidal ideation;
- development of irreversible memory dysfunction, tinnitus, and hyperacusis. …
Other symptoms include those described … in Dr Pierpont’s book entitled “Wind Turbine Syndrome, A Report on a Natural Experiment”, 2009 …
The Foundation is also concerned that Vibroacoustic Disease, as recorded and described by Professor Mariana Alves-Pereira’s team from Portugal, will develop in people chronically exposed to wind turbines.
The disease has already been identified in the occupants of a house with levels of infrasound and low frequency noise identical to levels the Foundation is recording in the homes of affected residents in Australia.
(The Waubra Foundation, 29 June 2011)
Sarah Laurie:
[Symptoms of WTS include tinnitus,] balance problems, dizziness, headaches, and … 'fuzzy thinking', or not being able to think clearly. …
Simon Chapman (1951):
This is a disease in search of a cause …
Sarah Laurie believes that lips can quiver at up to 10 kilometres away from a turbine and that wind turbines can make a stationary car rock at up to 1 kilometre.
Sarah Laurie:
We know that in the population roughly 10% of people will be quite severely motion sick.
And [they] seem to be the ones that develop the symptoms earlier. …
Richard Dowell:
At very high levels, it's … possible that low frequencies could be detected in the fluids of the inner ear …
[This could, perhaps, make you] dizzy or [feel] a little strange …
[But] I have never seen any clear evidence of that [actually] occurring …
[If] you measure the levels of infrasound in most cities from traffic and other sources, they're actually much higher levels than you get from a wind turbine …
[And at 300 metres or more] from the wind turbine [it becomes] very hard [to separate the] contribution of the wind turbine [from] normal wind noise. …
[The] literature review [we conducted in 2012] concluded there was no evidence of a link between the sounds generated by the turbines and any health symptoms. …
Sarah Laurie:
[There] is a connection between specific acoustic frequencies and the sleep disturbance …
[That] was according to the resident who took part in [Professor Con Doolan's] study.
Sarah Dingle:
[A] single resident?
Sarah Laurie:
The single resident, that's correct.
[There's] not a lot of data that's been collected, so we go on what we've got …
That's why we need [more research. …]
Ian Macfarlane [Opposition Energy Spokesperson]:
[The] concerns of the community are not satisfied by international studies.
What we need to do is do a report here in Australia … in the communities that claim to be affected and then come to a scientific and medically based position after that. …
Sarah Dingle:
If federal and state governments agree to fund the research you're calling for around the country, and it clears wind farms of any adverse impact on human health, would you accept that?
Sarah Laurie:
[The] adverse impacts have been shown by a number of studies, both overseas and in Australia.
peaceandlonglife:
Wind turbines are electric fans operating in reverse.
That is to say, electricity generators mirror electric motors.
A wind turbine converts the kinetic or mechanical energy of the wind into electricity.
Conversely, an electric motor in a fan uses electricity to drive the blades to create wind.
The types of sound produced by each device (turbulent airflow and electro-mechanical noise) are the same.
(Of course, all electric motors produce electro-mechanicial noise (eg refrigerators), whilst only appliances incorporating a fan would produce airflow noise.)
Thus, if electric fans are safe, it is likely that wind turbines are equally safe.
Simon Chapman (1951):
… 72% of the complaints [of WTS have] come from just six farms out of the 51 round Australia, and nearly 80% of those complaints have started after 2009.
[It was around that time that] some of the anti-wind turbine groups — who'd previously been mostly basing their opposition around aesthetics [— started to focus on] health problems. …
Sarah Laurie:
There are two patterns of symptoms that are characteristic for exposure to the very low frequency sound energy.- One of them is this waking up in a panicked state at night, and
- the other one is a very unusual and bizarre perception of body vibration.
Sometimes it can be as subtle as just your upper lip. …
Sarah Dingle:
Sarah Laurie also says her phone is being tapped.
Sarah Laurie:
I've had it confirmed by police on a number of occasions when I've complained.
Sarah Dingle:
Background Briefing has statements from the South Australian police and the AFP, saying they don't have any record of Dr Laurie's complaint, and the South Australian police say they have no evidence of her phone being tapped. …
Sarah Dingle:
The head of the NHMRC Professor Warwick Anderson says outside of universities there's no legal requirement to have an ethics committee oversee research involving humans. …
[The] acoustician, Les Huson [has] was conducting tests at six homes in Victoria and South Australia for the Waubra Foundation. [Residents were asked] to fill out questionnaires, which included a section for health complaints [including] the severity of symptoms. …
Sarah Laurie:
The residents notice that the turbines are not as noisy when the monitoring is going on …
[And] we've got some film footage [showing the turbines] turning at [markedly] different speeds [while the] wind is blowing at the same strength …
Sarah Dingle:
A senior engineer at Hydro Tasmania says individual wind turbines catch different wind speeds, even in a local area, and each turbine automatically adjusts to the wind, which is why they can turn at different rates. …
Fiona Crichton is a PhD candidate in psychological medicine at the University of Auckland.
In a paper published by the American Psychological Association, she and her co-authors decided to test whether expectations affected the number and severity of symptoms reported from infrasound …
[One] group of 27 people [were shown] a video of scientists explaining infrasound, saying there was no reason to assume it would affect health.
This was the low expectancy group.
She showed a second group video of media reports warning them of the health impacts of wind farms.
This was the high expectancy group.
Then she subjected both groups to ten minutes of real infrasound, and ten minutes of sham infrasound.
Fiona Crichton:
In the high expectancy group they experienced an elevation of symptoms both during sham and during infrasound.
The low expectancy group didn't experience any symptomatic change at all.
There was no physiological impact of the infrasound …
[It] was all about expectancy. …
[It's possible that Laurie, by] creating a health scare … could [be, inadvertently, creating] symptoms. …
Sarah Laurie:
I'm not telling them that it's going to make them sick …
… I'm very careful … to say to people that not everybody experiences symptoms.
Some people are fine.
Sarah Dingle:
There can be what's known as a 'psychological overlay' to symptoms. … Dowell says conditions like tinnitus and balance problems are common in older people, and psychological factors can considerably worsen the effects for some people.
Richard Dowell:
They then focus on that symptom very powerfully to the [extent] that they really can't even live their lives.
… I see a few similarities in some of the reports about these symptoms related to being close to wind farms.
Sarah Dingle:
That people feel anxious and ill is not disputed.
But there's been no evidence to date that wind turbines directly cause illness.
The fear of health effects may be harming those individuals.In 2011, the British Acoustics Bulletin published the [tenth] independent review of the evidence on wind farms causing annoyance and ill health in people. …
Ian Macfarlane [Opposition Energy Spokesperson]:[Annoyance] has far more to do with social and psychological factors in those complaining than any direct effect from sound or inaudible infrasound emanating from wind turbines. …
(Environmental impact of wind power — Noise Annoyance, Wikipedia, 6 July 2013)- being able to see wind turbines … increases annoyance [especially] in those who dislike or fear them [and]
- whether people derive income from hosting turbines …
Of all the other technologies very few have the capability to install around 1,000 MW per annum which is what's going to be required if we are to reach the 20% [Renewable Energy Target by 2020].
In fact the biggest challenge facing us getting to that target is to see enough wind farms built.
Would you like to know more? - New study: wind turbine syndrome is spread by scaremongers, The Conversation, 15 March 2013.
[Researchers] at the University of Auckland [have] published an experimental study showing that people primed by watching online information about health problems from wind turbines, reported more symptoms after being exposed to recorded infrasound or to sham (fake) infrasound.
[The] nocebo hypothesis [proposes] that anxiety and fear about wind turbines being spread about by anti-wind farm groups, will cause some people hearing this scary stuff to get those symptoms. …
Australia’s first wind farm, which still operates today, started generating power in 1993 at Esperance in Western Australia.
Twenty years on, our 49 wind farms have seen 1471 turbines turning for a cumulative total of 328 years.
[Since] 2009, we’ve heard a lot about health complaints involving wind turbines, thanks to the efforts of groups such as the Waubra Foundation (none of whose directors live in or near the Victorian town of Waubra) and the interconnected Landscape Guardians.
And, just as the nocebo hypothesis would predict … 82% of complainants made their first complaint after [2009.]
There are some 32,677 people living within 5km of these 49 wind farms … and just 120 — or one in 272 — of them have ever made formal complaints, appeared in news reports or sent complaining submissions to government.
Moreover, 81 (68%) of these are people living near just five wind farms, each of which have been heavily targeted by wind farm opponent groups. …
The first [claim] that wind turbines could cause health problems [was made in] 2003, when a British GP wrote an unpublished report about just 36 people scattered around the UK who all said the turbines made them ill.
A Victorian country GP followed this up with an even smaller study in 2004, where after dropping 25 questionnaires to people living near the local turbines, eight reported problems like sleep difficulties, stress and dizziness.
[In] any community, regardless of the presence or absence of wind turbines,- about a quarter to a third will have sleep problems,
- nearly half will have had a headache in the last week, and
- nearly one in six will have felt dizzy.
Spatio-temporal differences in the history of health and noise complaints about Australian wind farms: evidence for the psychogenic, “communicated disease” hypothesis.
Simon Chapman, Alexis St George, Karen Waller and Vince Cakic, Prepress, University of Sydney, 14 March 2013.
Abstract
Setting
All (n=51) Australian wind farms (with 1634 turbines) operating from 1993–2012.
Methods
Records of complaints about noise or health obtained from wind farm companies regarding residents living near 51 Australian wind farms, expressed as proportions of estimated populations residing within 5km of wind farms, and corroborated with complaints in submissions to 3 government public enquiries and news media records and court affidavits.
Results
33/51 (64.7%) of Australian wind farms including 17/34 (50%) with turbine size >1MW have never been subject to noise or health complaints.
These 33 farms have some 21,592 residents within 5km of their turbines and have operated complaint-free for a cumulative total of 267 years.
Western Australia and Tasmania have seen no complaints.
Only 131 individuals across Australia representing approximately 1 in 250 residents living within 5km of wind farms appear to have ever complained, with 94 (72%) of these being residents near 6 wind farms which have been targeted by anti wind farm groups.
About 1 in 87 (126/10901) of those living near turbines >1MW have ever complained.
The large majority 104/131 (79%) of health and noise complaints commenced after 2009 when anti wind farm groups began to add health concerns to their wider opposition.
In the preceding years, health or noise complaints were rare despite large and small turbined wind farms having operated for many years.
(emphasis added) - Curious distribution for wind turbine sickness, ABC The Science Show, 20 October 2012.
New technology has long attracted concerns about modern health worries.
{Australian hysteria about mobile telephone towers had its heyday in the late 1990s …
There are now [19 reviews] of the evidence on harm [all of] which are consistent [with] insignificant risk.}
[And yet, in] 35 years in public health I have never encountered anything remotely as apocalyptic [as WTS]. …
There are several reasons to suspect the unrecognised entity of wind turbine syndrome is psychogenic, a communicated disease spread by anti-wind interest groups, sometimes with connections to fossil fuel interests.
Wind farms first appeared about 20 years ago in the USA and have rapidly proliferated.
There are now just shy of 200,000 turbines around the world …
[The] first recorded claims about diseases occurred a decade later when two rural doctors in Wales and Victoria made widely repeated claims that have never been published in any research journal. …
{[They include] health problems [commonly] found in all communities, whether they have wind turbines or not … greying hair, energy loss, concentration lapses, weight gain and loss, and all the problems of ageing …}
Turbines are said to cause both chronic conditions [—] lung and skin cancer, diabetes, multiple sclerosis [— and] acute symptoms.
According to … Sarah Laurie, an unregistered [Australian] doctor, these can commence within 20 minutes of exposure. …
Why [then] do citizens [with] community owned turbines in … Germany and Denmark rarely complain?
[And, why] are complaints unknown in Western Australia where wind farms have operated for many years? …}
{[It seems that problems only occur] in particular regions and around certain farms and involve a small fraction of residents.}
Many wind farms have operated for years and never received a single complaint. …
Opponents … concede that only a [susceptible] minority of those exposed report being ill …
[But this does not explain how] whole regions and indeed nations [appear to] have no susceptible residents …
The key factor seems to be the presence … of anti-wind activists …
Farms with years of community acceptance can erupt with complaints when anti-wind activists arrive in town …
Prominent among these … are wealthy conservative landowners, appalled by [visibility of wind turbines owned by their less well-off neighbors who need to generate] extra income from their often hilly, poorer quality land. …
Health complaints are rare among turbine hosts and from those financially benefiting from communal ownership arrangements.
In Australia … a turbine can earn a host between $7,000 and $18,000 a year.
Hosts speak of drought proofing their farms when several turbines are hosted. …
In rural Australia, residential buyouts from mining companies are common. …
So when a cashed up company appears in the district, it is understandable that some see their ticket out via protracted complaints.
A recent Canadian case collapsed when [complainants refused to] provide their medical records going back 10 years [ostensibly because it was] too difficult to obtain … documentation that every doctor routinely keeps.
Opponents claimed that turbine hosts are gagged by confidentiality clauses …
I've seen several contracts [none of which required hosts to waive] their common-law rights to claims of negligence. …
Would you like to know more? -
Plain packaging of cigarettes, ABC Rear Vision, 19 October 2011.
Cynthia Callard: Executive Director, Physicians for a Smoke-Free Canada.
Robert Proctor: Professor of the History of Science, Stanford University, California.
Simon Chapman (1951):
[The first] health warning on the bottom of packs [was introduced in 1973:]Warning: Smoking is a health hazard.
We've had four generations of pack warnings since then, each introduced with major protests from the tobacco companies …
[In 1976] it became illegal to smoke on buses and trains. …
[We then] saw it go into workplaces and [later] hospitality venues, which actually should have been the first place it was introduced, because that's where the exposures are greatest. …
Tobacco advertising was first restricted from September 1976.
It was legislation which was introduced into the parliament by the Whitlam Government and then … implemented by the Fraser …
That [banned] smoking advertising [on] radio and television …
[In 1992 the] Tobacco Advertising Prohibition Act [put an end to] the Winfield Cup [rugby] … the football competitions and the motor racing sponsorships …
{John Elliott [President, Carlton Football Club]:
Every other minority group's gone to court.
I've now had hundreds of people ring me already saying we ought to take the MCC to court.
The community's basically 70/30 smoking and non-smoking and Australia has the only airports in the world that are non-smoking and it's the very insular society that won't look after minority groups like us.}
Simon Chapman (1951):
[Smoking] advertising inside shops … has gone.
[Finally,] displaying cigarettes has started to happen …
[There is] only one jurisdiction in Australia which hasn't yet implemented that yet. …
[Cigarettes are now] behind the counter, as prescription drugs are in the dispensary, and you have to ask for them. …
Cynthia Callard:
Tobacco companies had framed the issue as being government versus smokers, not government versus tobacco industry.
[It] took a long time to overcome that framing and for … political parties … to see that they could in fact introduce these measures with the support of smokers and not be perceived as being [hostile to many] of their constituents. …
It wasn't really until 2003 that we got an effective curtailment of tobacco promotion in Canada. …
The generation of kids that are now in our first wave of surveys of 14- to 15-year-olds—those are kids that were born in 1995, that would have grown up, gone to school after these advertisements had been removed — have half the smoking rates of the cohort ten years older than them. …
Mark Colvin [Radio National]:
From midnight tonight the excise on tobacco will go up by 25 per cent — $2.16 for a pack of 30 cigarettes. …
Kevin Rudd:
We estimate that 80 or 90,000 Australians will [give up cigarettes] based on the increase in the cost that we have announced. …
Simon Chapman (1951):
[Australia now has] some of the most expensive cigarettes in the world …
[In] Norway and the United Kingdom they're even more expensive …
[This] has been driving consumption down dramatically [which is] why the tobacco industry fight tooth and nail against all price rises. …
Robert Proctor:
[Even] though smokers are addicted, they do respond to pricing.
[There's] a price elasticity of around 0.4, which means that for every ten per cent you increase the price of cigarettes, smokers will smoke about half of that increase less. …
Keri Phillips:
[60 chemicals] that are known to cause cancer, have been found in tobacco and tobacco smoke.
Robert Proctor:
There are … simple measures that a regulatory state could implement that would radically reduce the number of people smoking.- [Dropping] the nicotine significantly below about 1 mg per cigarette, then the cigarette itself can no longer create or sustain addiction. …
- [Making] cigarette smoke … alkaline, the way it used to be with Native American tobacco [so] there'd be no inhalation.
- [Taking] out the [flavourings] that are put into cigarettes to make them more attractive …
Keri Phillips:
Why haven't governments gone down that path?
Robert Proctor:
[Because the Tobacco industry] is one of the most powerful … in the world.
[In] the 1960s when the Surgeon General first issued a report saying that tobacco was causing mass death, President Johnson [refused to] endorse the report …
[He feared] the Democrats would lose the presidency, because of the power of tobacco growers and the tobacco industry in the south. …
[So] policies have been centred around altering the information environment. …
[It's] a very different approach [to that taken with, say,] lead paint or asbestos.
[Everyone is] free to smoke as much as they want, but they [are] well informed while they do it. …
Simon Chapman (1951):
The main things which cause ill health in smokers are inhaling smoke.
It would be the same if you were inhaling combusted smoke from any source.
If you burnt straw and inhaled it, it wouldn't be good for you either.
The question as to whether the … additives — flavouring agents, chemicals, preservatives, temperature regulation chemicals [cause further harm is] an open question.
Certainly nobody's arguing that they [are] good for you …
[In] New South Wales … we had a ban on smoking in cars for children, [a] ban on displays of tobacco products in shops, and … significant increases [in] the budget of the Cancer Institute to run big campaigns. …
[The] tobacco industry [responded by] saying:[Show] us the evidence of the precise effect [of each specific intervention.]
[As] if society was a kind of a rat laboratory where you could partition people off who are only exposed to certain variables and not others.
[You] just can't do that. …
[But based on mathematical modelling: tax increases,] restrictions on smoking [and] large-budget hard-hitting education campaigns are probably the top three [most effective interventions.]
The rest [are] about de-normalising cigarettes.
[Ten years after] banning tobacco advertising we have the lowest rates of youth smoking in Australia tha[t] we've ever seen …
[A] person who is 19 has never seen a [domestic] tobacco advertisement …
Would you like to know more?
