Sir,
In reply to Mr. Arnone (PM 7/3) it has to be said that his letter was a masterpiece of dissimulation, misquotes and confusion. Has he been tutored by Tony Blair, I wonder? I never stated that ‘All air pollution is carcinogenic’; what I wrote was that all smoke is carcinogenic. This has definitely been known for decades despite what Mr Arnone thinks. It is pointless to ask why WHO did a study since a huge number of studies merely confirm what we already know, but they may add some further scientific evidence. The tobacco industry itself still conducts endless painful experiments on animals forcing them to smoke themselves to cancer or death. Why?
There are hundreds, if not thousands, of independent studies confirming the dangers of second hand smoke: all lies of course according to Mr. Arnone. The repeated, patronising use of my first name is another clever ploy to create an atmosphere of emotional superiority where there is no factual evidence and an intellectual vacuum.
It is understandable that many smokers do not want to face the facts and their favourite blame game is to divert the hazard of smoking to that of vehicle exhaust. A paid lacky of the industry did this at the First World Congress on Smoking and Health: much to the amusement of the rest of the delegates. It’s rather like saying, “Let’s ignore bank robberies because there are shoplifters!” I suppose the game started when Adam blamed Eve and Eve blamed the serpent – or whatever it was before it was changed into a serpent.
I cannot answer for the USA but in the UK tobacco tax does not even meet the cost of medical treatment and lost working days resulting from smoking. I wonder if Mr. Arnone would like to go back to pre-tax days when tobacco carried the death penalty? The story is even more alarming. Contrary to what Mr. Arnone thinks, governments are frequently prevented from passing legislation by the powerful tobacco lobbyists. Smokers do not like the truth and they do not like legislation. I found it highly amusing that the people of Acheh complained that the authorities were ‘interfering in their private lives’ when they were told not to smoke. Amusing because they are told every day what they can and cannot eat, what they may or may not drink and, especially in the case of women, what clothing they may or may not wear. Mr. Arnone doesn’t want me to say that smoking is hazardous because it is not my business. I have news for him: it is my business as a physician to state the facts: it is his right to ignore them.
It is, regretfully, smokers who are in denial; not those of us who expose this filthy demeaning habit for what it is. Mr. Arnone might learn something if he looked at the sort of people who smoke and those who do not: the Pope for example.
M.N.
