| HOME | New Additions | NEWS ITEMS | ARTICLES | Letters from the Papers and DoH, MP & Press Emails | ODDS & SODS | LINKS | CONTACT |
An MPs intransigence or
'make like an ostrich' - correspondence with a Welsh MP
Dear Mr Cuthbert
I have just been reading your comments regarding the Smoking Ban. http://www.jeffcuthbert.co.uk/index.php?page=assembly As is now normal, you are just one of many politicians who are totally misinformed with regard to Environmental Tobacco Smoke. You state 'About 400 deaths each year in Wales are attributed to passive smoking.' I dread to think where you got that figure from as there has never been a single death attributed to Passive Smoking anywhere in the U.K. There is no scientific evidence that proves that ETS is anything other than an irritant that can be controlled and removed by Ventilation, Air Filtration linked to an Indoor Air Quality Standard. A typical standard already in operation:
An example of a current Standard in operation providing a safe and healthy environment is:
1. Particles - Below 0.15 mg/m3
2. Concentration of Carbon Monoxide - Below 10 part/million per 8hrs
3. Concentration of CO2 - Below 1000 parts/million per 8 hr
4. Room Temperature - Between 17ºC and 28ºC
5. Room Humidity - Between 40º and 70º
6 Incoming air velocity - 0.2m/sec
7. Air velocity in the room - Below 0.5 m/sec per person
8. Air Exchange - 6-10 times/hour
You also
state 'When the committee’s work began I believed that it
was possible to allow smoking in segregated areas of buildings
(such as in pubs) provided that the air extraction system was of
high quality. However, the evidence from expert groups, including
air extraction manufactures, showed us that smoke cannot be
completely removed. After a lengthy and detailed examination of
the facts we agreed unanimously to recommend that the only
workable solution is a complete ban.' Again I must ask as
to who the experts were who you spoke to as again they and you
are wrong. Sweden, Denmark Holland (The Dutch
Government accepted the findings of the RIVM
Study) , Spain, Malta, Italy and Japan have all implemented
solutions to allow smokers and non-smokers to socialise in safe
environments, the question must be asked as to why the U.K. finds
it impossible to take similar actions. You state;'I have
been to Ireland and Scotland and found that the measure is
welcomed. People work, meet, and socialise in a smoke free
atmosphere. Benefits to public health are being recorded
already.' I am at a loss to understand this statement as
smoking has increased in Ireland since the implementation of
their ban followed by a similar trend in New York. Last week it
was announced that sales of cigarettes had increased by 5% in
Scotland. I accept that a recent study from Dundee
University shows an improvement in the respiratory functions of
some bar staff but as this was not a controlled study it is quite
possible that the introduction of Indoor Air Quality Standards as
mentioned earlier would have had the same results without the
need for a smoking ban. Smoking Bans create havoc within
the countries who have implemented them. Ireland at least
600 pubs closed and 12500 jobs lost within the Hospitality Sector
Norway .http://www.parliament.uk/commons/lib/research/rp2005/rp05-079.pdf Government said
there was no impact on pubs yet in their own publication this is
stated on Norway - they lied what's new!
"In Norway, the number of pubs, bars and restaurants that
went bankrupt declined in the seven month period after the
smoking ban was implemented in 2004. In 2003, 386 businesses in
the sector went bankrupt and in 2004, this declined to 372,
including the
closure of 338 restaurants and 34 bars." Scotland,
since 26th March 64 pubs have closed and at least 6 Bingo Halls
New York.... http://www.davehitt.com/facts/badforbiz.html Technology provides
solutions to ETS...all that is required is a little research here
are a few links for rapid research www.tornex.com This equipment is
so good that Government in Westminster have been clients for over
5 years Installations include the Offices of
the Deputy Prime Minister; The Department of Trade &
Industry; Department of Transport, Department for International
Development, East Kilbride; Volvo U.K, Marks & Spencer
plc, Centre Point; Microsoft, World Customs Organisation,
Brussels (break-out area) and more recently Hertfordshire NHS
Trust, Priory Group, St Andrews Healthcare, Leeds NHS Trust,
Partnerships in Care and more recently Oxford & Bucks NHS
Trust.
Now pure science provides the solution in the form of Plasmacluster
Ion Technology. This technology deactivates Tobacco
Smoke turning it into water based molecules, it is simple,
harmless and is a proven technology with over 10 million
generators in operation globally in the past 5 years.
Plasmacluster Ion Technology is endorsed by the Asthma Society of
Canada as well as the National Asthma Council of Australia.
Again a few links to show you the way forward, this system
is 99.75% effective in cleaning the air natures way. http://sharp-world.com/plasma_c/features/index.html http://www.sharp.ca/products/ion/video_fr.html http://www.jama-english.jp/europe/news/2005/mar-apr/peternunn.html Plasmacluster Ion
Technology has been proven to deactivate H5N1 Avian Flu Virus
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=25784 As well as
SARS http://www.airconsulting.nl/plasma.pdf see slide 4 of 4
Where larger commercial property is concerned UVC Emitter
Light Sources provide a solution http://www.steril-aire.com/ A short video
explains all http://www.peterbeale.com/Steril-Aire/MOLDWARS.html In addition it is
important to read this http://www.nsc.org/ehc/indoor/sbs.htm You and your fellow
Assembly members must think seriously about the social and
economic effects that smoking bans have on the communities. The
general public now know what has happened in Scotland as a result
the rest of the nation is set to kick back.... http://www.fifenow.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1019&ArticleID=1666815 http://www.fifenow.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=1019&ArticleID=1803209 http://www.lutontoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=541&ArticleID=1649413 http://www.newsandstar.co.uk/news/viewarticle.aspx?id=418982 http://www.blackpooltoday.co.uk/ViewArticle2.aspx?SectionID=62&ArticleID=1743639#pagecontent Can you risk
this happening to a town near you.... http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/index.cfm?id=1543912006#new ASH the self
appointed advisors to Government has openly admitted that they
have played a confidence trick on politicians http://society.guardian.co.uk/health/story/0,,1823348,00.html My own local
Director of Public Health openly opposes bans of any sort and
advocates the following actions to improve the health of the
nation... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/happiness_formula/4924180.stm SMOKING Bans affect
the wider community far beyond that of the Hospitality Sector,
Pensioners Lunch Clubs, Bingo Halls even farmers on their
tractors and do nothing to improve the health of the nation.
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=52114 It is time
that you and your colleagues woke up to this fact of life and
looked towards modern technology to overcome what is a Health
and Safety at Work issue more than a Health issue.
As the Smoking Ban in England is set to be the subject of
a Judicial Review, I strongly recommend that the Welsh assembly
rethink the perceived issues of PASSIVE SMOKING
Set an Indoor Air Quality Standard,
then businesses have the choice to match the
standard by investing in the equipment to achieve the standard or
to elect to be non-smoking venues. A market mix of smoking and
non-smoking venues will evolve, with good signage at the
entrances patrons can then make the choice as to
whether they then enter or not....or is this too simple,
I have much information on the subject that I am
more than willing to provide on CD ROM
Regards Bill Gibson (lifelong non-smoker) East Hayrigg Lockerbie DG11 1BJ
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Response from Cuthbert
Dear Mr Gibson
Thank
you for this. I will read it.
The
record of the proceedings of the Assembly Committee can be
accessed through the Assembly web-site.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Cuthbert
Mr Cuthbert There is a simple question that I will ask you....name three people who have died as a result of Passive Smoking. I am a non-smoker from a medical family,what you will achieve is simply to transfer the issue from a pub or club into the family home where children whose vital organs are not fully debeloped will be put at greater risk. (see attachment) There have been over 150 studied varried out on the effects of ETS
A study presented by Enstrom & Kabat shows that ETS has a very small association with cancer but is so small it should be ignored. The group comprised 35,561 people who did not smoke but whose spouse was a smoker. They were among 118,094 adults who took part in a cancer prevention study carried out from 1959 to 1998 by the American Cancer Society Although many smokers, as expected, fell sick with heart disease, lung cancer and respiratory blockage, no such association was found for the passively-smoking spouses, the authors said. "The results do not support a causal relation between environmental tobacco smoke and tobacco-related mortality, although they do not rule out a small effect.
http://www.scientificintegrityinstitute.org/defense.html
The study was backed by anti-smoking crusader Dr. Elizabeth Whelan. "There is simply no convincing evidence linking second-hand smoke to lung cancer and heart disease," said Whelan, an epidemiologist and president of the American Council on Science and Health. Whelan, author of "A Smoking Gun: How the Cigarette Industry Gets Away with Murder," said her group's research has reached the same conclusion as the new study. While Whelan said she's delighted by New York City's smoking ban, she labels "patently absurd" Mayor Bloomberg's claim that it would prevent 1,000 deaths of bar and restaurant workers.
http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.215/news_detail.asp
In a brief survey leading
worldwide assurance firms confirmed they do not consider passive
smoking as an insurance or assurance risk.
Underwriters hold a key
responsibility in assessing risks for weighting of policies.
Whilst those with existing health problems, dangerous jobs or
smokers face policy loading to reflect their personal risk, no
such policy loading occurs for “passive smokers”. In
the survey each assurance company helpdesk adviser sought an
opinion from underwriters’ departments. Two leading firms,
headquartered in Scotland where the ban on smoking in public
places is enforced, denied passive smoking presents a risk.
Scottish Widows (Lloyds TSB
Group) stated after enquiry with underwriters that they would
only require to know if a person has directly smoked or taken
nicotine products within the last year. Passive smoking is simply
not an issue.
Standard Life, who has lost
billions of pounds sterling in the last four years, has every
reason to take steps to protect their finances further confirmed
this. Even so, underwriters there charged with the high
responsibility of risk assessment, find no reason to treat
passive smoking as an issue.
Assurance underwriters take
into account many factors in their policies and practices,
including scientific evidence and mortality rates. But their
findings conflict directly with those put forward by UK
government authorities.
So who’s right? The
qualification as actuary is considered one of the most difficult
to obtain, rating along with surgeons and architects. It would
appear incredible that actuaries in their work as global
underwriters could get the passive smoking issue wrong.
Government ministers,
though, take ”evidence” and opinion from
interested parties and lobbyists. Those with the biggest clout
and the largest coffers tend, in time, to succeed.
The Scottish Executive in
presenting and succeeding with ban legislation in the Scottish
Parliament did not appear to mention underwriter
findings in their debate. Nor, so far has HMG seem to
have included the issue..Legislation passed in absence of such a
critical issue as why insurance and assurance underwriters do not
consider passive smoking a risk must inevitably be viewed as
flawed legislation.
British Heart Foundation Corrects Inaccurate Claim about Effects of Second-hand Smoke
Some three weeks ago apparently in response to criticism about an inaccurate claim on its web site, the British Heart Foundation has changed its web site to correct its assertion that "for every four non-smokers who work in a smoky environment like a pub, one of them will suffer disability and premature death from a heart condition because of second-hand smoke."
That claim has now been
eliminated. The inaccuracy stemmed from confusion about the
difference between relative risk and absolute risk. A 25%
increased risk of death among bar workers due to second-hand
smoke exposure does not mean that 25% of bar workers exposed to
second-hand smoke will die from that exposure. The 25% increased
risk is relative risk, but the claim that 25% of bar workers will
die from the exposure refers to absolute risk. To make it clear
to everyone, the risk to staff working in a pub environment from
Passive Smoking is so small it is immeasurable as a result of all
the variables within and out with the premises.
Thanks must go to
Prof. Michael Siegel, Researcher for the Tobacco Control Dept.
USA for his valued contribution on this matter.
The British Heart Foundation is to be congratulated for quickly and decisively correcting this inaccurate public claim. It is clear that this organization is concerned about the accuracy of its scientific statements and when the problem was called to its attention, it promptly responded by deleting the incorrect statement. I only wish that the 44+ anti-smoking groups which have made inaccurate claims about the acute cardiovascular effects of second-hand smoke would follow the British Heart Foundation's lead by retracting or correcting their fallacious statements. I think we'll see, pretty quickly, in the days ahead, whether or not the anti-smoking movement including the Scottish Executive is truly concerned about its scientific integrity or whether it is simply trying to push its agenda, even at the expense of the accuracy of its reporting of the science."
The truth is out there Mr Cuthbert all you have to do is search it out.
http://www.news-medical.net/?id=18346
http://www.kirotv.com/investigations/9691562/detail.html
http://www.kirotv.com/investigations/9691562/detail.html
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2090-2340952,00.html
http://www.greenocktelegraph.co.uk/readstory.php?id=7666
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=663&id=1457052006
http://news.scotsman.com/topics.cfm?tid=663&id=1241552006
Mr Cuthbert, many parts of the USA are now reversing their Smoking Restrictions in the face of economic disasters.
Regards
Bill Gibson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To Cuthbert
Mr Cuthbert On a final note I would ask you to read the three documents within the attached folder. This is the truth, I have no need or inclination to peddle lied. Please pay particular arrention to the Critique Response to the Welsh Bill as I doubt you will not have seen this. To enact a Smoking Ban as is being proposed will be hugely detrimental to the social and economic fabric of Wales. It is not too late to request a full review of the Bill....here are 7 reasons why a Smoking Ban is unnecessary 1. Ventilation 2. Air Filtration 3. Indoor Air Quality Standards 4. Controlled Designated Smoking Areas 5. Pure Science in the form of Plasmacluster Ion Technology / UVC Emitter Light Sources 6. The public want more Smoking Restrictions...not a total ban 7. Probably the most important one to the nation's health HAPPINESS At least I present real solutions...not just statements against a ban, personally I would be happy with a total ban on the sales of tobacco products however a black hole of 9.7 billion pounds would then have to be plugged. Regards Bill Gibson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Cuthbert A message from Prof. Michael Siegel, Senior Researcher at the Tobacco Control Department, USA http://tobaccoanalysis.blogspot.com/2006/10/action-on-smoking-and-health-promoting.html Take heed of what this gentleman states, for some considerable time he has become deeply concerned with the actions of pressure groups such as ASH Regards Bill Gibson
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
3 weeks ago
I attended a meeting of some rather unhappy licensees who
are at their wits end as the smoking ban brings their businesses
to their knees. One bingo hall owner told me at the current
loss of trade he would not make Christmas. Most other
publicans of small bars reported takings down by
at least £2,000 a week - over a year that’s £104,000
– large amount for the small local pubs that serve
communities.
One stand-up guy from Fife said that while Thatcher may have
closed the mines McConnell is closing the miners’ Clubs.
Vote Labour? Nobody in the room was prepared to
countenance it ever again.
The
Treasury must be feeling the pinch too. One venue sent in a
VAT return that last year paid the Custom & Excise £12,000
– for the same quarter this year but after the ban his
return delivered only £4,000. Spread these type of results
across Scotland – and eventually the whole of the UK –
and whomsoever happens to be the Chancellor in a year’s time
will be having the same problems of making ends meet that the
publicans are facing now.
You will not get this
information from the Scottish Executive as they do not care about
such matters being that they are financed direct from
Westminster and protected by the Barnett Formula
Other
parties shouldn’t get too excited with the prospect of
capitalising on Labour’s woes. The licensees know that
the Lib Dems and SNP voted the ban through too - and even though
the Tories voted against it they have been strangely silent on
the issue since action-girl Annabel took over from the fuming
David McLetchie.
Help could be at hand however. The Publican Party is
wanting to stand a candidate in each of the eight regional lists.
If the anger is as real as I witnessed it on Wednesday
night – and voters can be motivated to give their second
vote to a party that wants the ban amended to allow smoking in
regulated circumstances – then a small group could hold sway
in the coalition negotiations. King-size king makers -
maybe, only they won’t be meeting in a smoke filled room!
Another meeting is scheduled for tomorrow evening 925
October 2006) to further the plans on selecting candidates
to contest the Scottish Elections in May 2007. What you portray
in your web site does not match the true facts of what is
happening north of the border. http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23371787-details/Council+bans+its+workers%27+smoking/article.do Councils up ad
down the country are in danger of being in breach of the European
Human Rights Convention as has already been proven in a Norwegian
Court of Law. http://www.aftenposten.no/english/local/article772700.ece You stated in
your kind response yesterday, 'They all seek to persuade me that
passive smoking it not dangerous to health. A suggestion that I
find absurd. ' Mr Cuthbert,
with all due respect you are not qualified sufficiently to be
judgemental on such an issue. However here is someone who is
qualified in such matters from a doctor and past
president of the New York Cancer Society and this is what he
writes. I’m Robert E. Madden MD,
FACS. I am also a non-smoker. HOWEVER I am a passionate opponent
smoking bans. Most of the opposition to the smoking bans has been
based upon economic factors such as loss of business revenue,
even closings. My opposition is due to loss of individual freedom
and abuse of scientific fact.
I am a practicing chest surgeon, a teacher and a
former cancer researcher. I am also past president of the NY
Cancer Society. I will not tell you that smoking is harmless and
without risk, in fact one in eight hundred smokers will develop
lung cancer. Asthmatics should avoid tobacco smoke. What I will
say is: 1) it’s a personal choice and 2) so called second
smoke (ETS) is virtually harmless. One may not like the smell but
it has not been shown to cause cancer, even in bartenders. If
people do not like the odor then they may go elsewhere. Those who
support the ban have no right to deny 24% of the adult population
their enjoyment of a popular product based on dislike, possibly
hatred of smoking. This attitude is that of a bigot, akin to
anti-Semitism or racism.
To me the most offensive element of the smoking
bans is the resort to science as “proving that environmental
smoke, second hand smoke, causes lung cancer”. Not only is
this unproven but there is abundant and substantial evidence to
the contrary. It is frustrating, even insulting, for a scientist
like myself to hear the bloated statistics put out by the
American Cancer Society (of which I am a member) and the American
Lung Association used to justify what is best described as a
political agenda. Smokers enjoy smoking. Most non-smokers are
neutral. Anti-smokers hate smoking. It is this last group that
drives the engine of smoking bans. Smoking sections in
restaurants, ventilated bars and the like have been satisfactory
and used for years. To those who choose to smoke they do so at
their own risk. To those eschew smoking let them patronize
establishments whose owners prohibit smoking. To impose a city
wide or a state wide ban is to deny people of their rights.
-Respectfully,
Robert E. Madden, M.D.
Mr Cuthbert, I hope that in these recent correspondences I have demonstrated to you that there are ways by which a compromise solution can be presented that will protect the social and economic fabric of Wales and in the long term lead to a healthier nation. Target the youth of the nation by way of community led projects as being demonstrated by my local football club, Gretna FC who have attended Westminster and presennted their plans to cross-party poiticians. http://www.gretnafootballclub.co.uk/community/programme.html Regards Bill Gibson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From
Cuthbert Dear Mr Gibson
You will be aware (I trust) of the lengthy and detailed
consultation that the Committee on Smoking in Public Places went
through many months ago. Therefore I am surprised that I should
receive so much information and opinion from you "after the
horse has bolted". Did you not seek to provide evidence to
our Committee when it was sitting? If not, why not? The
proceedings are available on the Assembly's website.
Now that the Assembly has taken its decision, I see no need to
re-open the matter. Best wishes Jeff Cuthbert
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Cuthbert Not being a resident of Wales and at the time not being directly affected by the decisions of Government I did not make a submission. However in the light of evidence of the economic problems now being faced by the residents of Scotland as well as Ireland and with the prospect of tax increases that will be required in the very near future to offset Treasury losses I felt it important that you and your colleagues should be made very aware of the dire consequences of your actions. ACTIONS that can and should be avoided. In view of the impending Judicial Review, should this be found in favour of the Group opposed to the ban (a mix of smokers and non-smokers who wish to have the Freedom to Choose) then the whole Smoking Ban issue will have to be re-examined. I am aware that the evidence against the ban is overwhelming and with one of the country's leading Advocates, Mr Richard Gordon Q.C. set to challenge Government the expectations are high that the current Bill will be amended to include the facility of Ventilation, Air Filtration linked to Indoor Air Quality Standards and rightly so. When the time comes, you cannot now say that you were not aware that real solutions exist and that question will arise in May 2007. Regards Bill Gibson
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Cuthbert It was your false statements on your web site that made me present the true facts to you. Where you obtained your information must be fully investigated. You may also have been told that there is no safe level of Air Quality....this is yet another lie. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration in the USA has confirmed: OSHA has established PELs (Permissible Exposure Levels) for all the measurable chemicals, including the 40 alleged carcinogens, in secondhand smoke. PELs are levels of exposure for an 8-hour workday from which, according to OSHA, no harm will result.
OSHA has stated outright that:
"Field
studies of environmental tobacco smoke indicate that under normal
conditions, the components in tobacco smoke are diluted below
existing Permissible Exposure Levels (PELS.) as referenced in the
Air Contaminant Standard (29 CFR 1910.1000)...It would be very
rare to find a workplace with so much smoking that any individual
PEL would be exceeded."
-Letter From Greg Watchman, Acting Ass't Sec'y, OSHA, To
Leroy J Pletten, PHD, July 8, To see the full list of
acceptable levels go to: http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9992 Politicians north
of the border are actively encouraging me to stand for election
to the Scottish Parliament on an Independent ticket...should I
accept the challenge, I know that I will win as the people of
Scotland have had enough of the Dictatorship that has emerged
from the Scottish Executive, are you sure of being returned to
your Assembly when the truth emerges regarding the Smoking Ban?
Best wishes for the future Bill Gibson
-------------------------------------------------------
How
dare you claim that I made a "false statement". My
information is from a highly respected medical Officer.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You claimed that 400 deaths were caused by Passive Smoking each year in Wales....I now challenge you to provide evidence of that. I have already asked you to name 3 peiple who have died as a result of Passive Smoking. Typical of Governments, Norway and Sweden come out with virtually the same figures for Passive Smoking Deaths annually.... http://odin.dep.no/hod/english/news/speeches/minister/042071-070112/dok-bn.html http://www.sweden.gov.se/sb/d/5628/a/45113 Yet I have shown that Passive Smoking is not the health risk that is presented by Government Agencies and Health Professionals. You stated that Public Health was already seeing an improvement in Ireland and Scotland...again provide the evidence. It is as simple as that. http://www.smokefreenorthernireland.com/default.aspx?s=News%2FMedia&a=IrelandSlightIncreaseInSmokingPrevalence http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2090-2405003,00.html In addition there has been an increase of approximately 10% in child hospital admissions for respiratory complaints in Ireland and in particular Dublin as a direct result of increased prevelance of smoking within the home. Therefore my claim of you making false statements on the web site stands....I further commented that the source of your information must be examined. Bill Gibson
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr Cuthbert
Regarding your flawed statement on Ireland 27
October 2006 - Irish Examiner
Fears as smoking ban results reversed
http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=ireland-qqqm=ireland-qqqa=ireland-qqqid=16861-qqqx=1.asp
By Evelyn Ring
THE decline in smoking since the workplace ban was introduced in
2004
has now been reversed, the Irish Cancer Society (ICS)
claimed
yesterday.
The society is particularly alarmed at the growing number of
young
women and teenagers who are taking up smoking. There has been
a
reversal in the decline in smoking among teenagers with
around
one-in-five of 15 to 18-year-olds now smoking cigarettes.
Almost
one-in-four of the population smoke.
The figures, taken from the Office of Tobacco Control’s June
survey,
also shows that the dominant smoking group is made up of those
between
19 and 35 — around a third are smokers and represent just
under half of
all age groups. The ICS has blamed the Government for the rise
in
smoking among young adults and has called for a €2 increase
in the
price packs of 20 cigarettes.
I now hope that you have picked up your toys that you
threw out of your pram the other day when having your tantrum as
a result of my observations of your web site. I have as is now
normal, yet again to be proven right.
Regards Bill Gibson
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dear
Mr Gibson
You
are drawing conclusions that are as erroneous as your overall
arguments. I have far more confidence in the opinion given by
independent medical experts and scientists. Overwhelmingly they
reject the approach put forward by you and others with similar
interests.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well each to their
own..personally I have greater faith in my local vet, as a vet's
training is far superior to that of a medic.. You have yet
to provide your evidence...but as you by your own admission do
not trust or accept Government Agency Data 'The figures,
taken from the Office
of Tobacco Control’s June survey, also shows that the dominant
smoking group is made up of those between 19 and 35 — around
a third are smokers and represent just under half of all age
groups.'
then you will be unable to do so Face up to the fact...you
have been well and truly conned
Regards Bill Gibson.