Real Texas Freedom

Tuesday, July 19, 2005

Crooked Research

I was in a hurry when I answered this before.
No doubt about the government.
What's not clear is how the obvious has not been researched properly, that being cancer is a genetic disease, the cellular genes go haywire, and how much is caused by environmental mutation and how much is hereditary.
Scientific Method calls for 4 steps: 1. Observation 2. Hypothesis 3. Theory and 4. Conclusion. What's clear to me is that when the same environment produces different effects in different people, then heredity has to play a major role.
High levels of carcinogen, particularly radiation, have been firmly established to cause cancer in all human beings. However, why some and not all the others when the levels are the same, and in many cases even higher for those who don't get cancer? The answer is because heredity plays a role.
Cancer existed before the 1940's when nuclear explosions and testing began. The disease appears to be more prevalent now than then but diagnostic records were not always accurate regarding cancer and non- existent for most of medical history.
Mutations are the very essence of animal development, the sun and the lack of it being major contributors. Step number one in Scientific Method, Observation, becomes all important in establishing research direction. For instance, there's too many old smokers around to observe that second hand smoke is anything but a redundant issue.
You said it all regarding the government but I'm still glad that nuclear power was developed. Now, we just have to deal with it, preferably with truth and justice. P. S. The only private sector group not being controlled by the government is corporate state big money interests. They get all the freedom!!!!!

Sam Nettles -"Real Texas Freedom" or
----- Original Message -----
From: Jack Ritchie
To: sam nettles
Sent: Saturday, May 21, 2005 9:40 AM
Subject: Re: Fw: Crooked Research
Hi Sam,

Something else to consider on this subject. Government has played a major part in stirring up the masses.

There was a professor back in the sixties & seventies that came up with an interesting fact.
During the 1940's to 1980's the governments (especially our very own), were doing atmospheric testing of nuclear bombs. Radiation has a half life of over 100,000 years. So the fallout from those will remain in our ecological chain until apprx the year 98,960 at which time it will still be present at half strength for another 100,000 years.... The world weather system spreaded this in a diluted form all over the world in a matter of days.

Still there are no new facts about smoking...all the so called research is generated from manipulated data, targeted surveys, and abstract exagerations. But radiation is proven to cause cell mutation, and one form of cell mutation previlent in our society is cancer.

So, by this observation, our government caused the spread of cancer. So it would benefit the government to find a scapegoat and at the same time use them as a reason for continued expansion/increasing control over the private section. Using discrimination as a social engineering tool has made it easy.

Jack R
Houston, Tx

sam nettles wrote:

Anti-Smokers To face Humiliation And Monetary Loss

Well, it was announced yesterday, that the South Koreans have opened the door to eradicating disease and physical damage to the human body by cloning human beings for stem cells.
I just hope we don't end up like same sex worms, overpopulating the earth while crawling to extinction.

Sam Nettles -"Real Texas Freedom" or
----- Original Message -----
From: sam nettles
To: Bill Murawski
Cc: Samantha Phillipe
Sent: Sunday, May 15, 2005 10:04 PM
Subject: Re: Crooked Research
I suppose there are many cover up issues, each group having their own list. Major air polluters are happy to blame tobacco smoke. So are doctors who have a culprit to blame when they don't know what they are doing. Airlines, who started the major federal involvement, saved millions when they switched the cabin air intake system and didn't have to worry about a smoker backlash. There are many reasons to blame tobacco smoke and a ready made prejudice made it easy for all. If you are a non-smoker, you just don't care and if you are an anti-smoker, you don't like the smell.
Of course, the money and political parts are all encompassing. The polarizing effects are enormous and easy to capitalize on.
The other possibility you mention covers a lot of ground. My first wife was a Registered Nurse and I studied one of her college textbooks, Tabor's Medical Encyclopedia, pretty extensively. Nicotine stimulates the pituitary gland, which regulates all the other glands. It cuts back hormones when there are too many and adds hormones when there aren't enough. There's enough medical stuff there to make doctors and druggists cringe with worry over medicating losses. The drug Welbutrin, an anti-depressant, works like nicotine and was developed during one of the smoking studies. A pill can't replace the action of smoking, though, and the drug's side effects are enormous and dangerous. Smoking only causes a constriction of blood vessels robbing oxygen from the body. Too much oxygen will give you a headache, anyway.

I could go on and on but I really believe that human genetics holds all the answers and will answer all the questions shortly, if they'll stop spending all the money on anti-smoking studies.
Just some food for thought Sam. Let me know what you think.

The question is:

What is the underlying problem they are trying to cover up with their, pardon the pun, "smoke-screen" scam?

There are two possibilities as I see it. First, there is the issue of dangerous pesticide POISONS used on the growth of the tobacco. Then the additives come. And finally, the bleached paper that as I am informed, causes dioxin when lit. So in total, there are perhaps over 500 "chemicals" that are inhaled with the lighting of a cigarette!?!?

The other issue is that I've recently discovered that there is some on-going research tying in something -- nicotine perhaps -- in the cigarette that when it is smoked helps in alleviating or delaying or something positive to combat a disease I can't exactly recall right now but I think it is Alzheimer's. Therefore, perhaps the smoking ban is causing more people to stop smoking so they won't benefit from the potential positive from smoking and instead be further socked financially by the pharmaceutical company with a "new drug" for an old disease.



----- Original Message -----
From: sam nettles
To: aphillips ; Archie A. ; armandoc ; Arnie ; ArnnTexas ; arnold ; arodrigu ; Arthur Ellsworth ; AUBREY BURKE ; baan ; badjjd ; balvarado ; Barbara Edmonds ; Barbara Porsch ; Barb's Email ; Barry McKay ; Batman4477 ; bb ; bb ; bchesney ; benson donna ; Betty ; bhgarcia ; bill ; bill ; Bill & Thelma Lee ; Bill Murawski ; bjmeo ; bkawazoe ; bkurland
Sent: Saturday, May 14, 2005 10:32 PM
Subject: Crooked Research

Audrey Silk is a NYC police lady busily working to get the truth out about anti-smokers. She has appeared on several TV shows, including the Comedy Channel's Jon Stewart show.
My own observation is that if all the money that has been spent scientifically unsuccessfully, on trying to tie smoking to every known medical problem of mankind, had been spent on cures, there would be no cancer.

Sam Nettles "Real Texas Freedom"

PRESS RELEASEFOR IMMEDIATE RELEASEMay 11, 2005Contact Audrey Silk, NYC C.L.A.S.H., (917) SMOKING BAN TARGETS TO AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY: BUTT OUT. FUNDRAISING/ DONATIONS TO CEASE Coming together as a first-ever nationally formed alliance, business associations and citizens' rights groups who have had their private property rights and free will usurped, will no longer help fund the American Cancer Society, American Lung Association or the American Heart Association. At issue is the charities' relentless pursuit of smoking bans in city and state legislatures all across the country -- ban legislation that the charities themselves very frequently help to write and then promote to the general public. Strongly noted too is that by using their tax-deductible donations for lobbying for legislation they are teetering on the edge of violating the IRS code for charitable organizations. The ACS, for example, is currently sponsoring a radio and print blitz, urging New Jerseyans to phone their representatives demanding a local ban. And, according to their own press release, Chicago is next. Contrary to reports pumped out by smoking ban proponents, these smoking bans decimate mom-n-pop businesses and are intended to make pariahs out of adults engaging in a legal behavior. Clearly, businesses that hold fundraisers for, and citizens who donate to, these health organizations are giving to groups that then use that money to destroy and attack them. "No more," says Audrey Silk, founder of NYC C.L.A.S.H. (Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment). "We will stop contributing to Big Nanny. Why do we want to donate to groups that are out to ruin our businesses and demean us as human beings?" This misuse of funds -- funds that should be dedicated to more research and less "bureaucratic backwaters" -- is apparent to In ranking the top 100 biggest charities in order of which "spends the public's money wisely" has the ACS coming in at #93. Jim Avolt, a spokesman for an Ohio business group that's part of the alliance rates it even lower than that. He points out, "I feel the ACS, the ALA and the AHA should all lose their non-profit status. They were significant financial donors to the pro-ban forces at work in Toledo. And the irony of it was," Avolt continues, "they were using the same money we'd given them in donations and just handing it right over to our political opponents." "What's more," Silk adds on behalf of furious smokers, "is that the ACS is also behind demands on state legislatures to make smokers pay more in taxes in order to legislatively control legal human behavior they don't approve of and to fund their increasingly ineffective programs. The states get millions of dollars a year through the Master Settlement Agreement -- a hidden tax already paid by smokers -- but because the states shortchange the ACS programs they want to shake us down for more!" Incredibly, the ACS is behind taxation without representation when smokers are made to "pay up and get out." This boycott will continue indefinitely, with more groups and private citizens expected to join in. But it doesn't mean that members of the alliance won't continue to donate -- just not to those charities. There are thousands of worthy ones out there and they'll be the recipients of contributions instead. Charities like Make-A-Wish Foundation, Mary Crowley Medical Research Center, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center and the Shriners Hospital for Children are just a few of the favorites, as are people in dire medical need in each of our own local areas. The alliance agrees that cancer and heart disease research will not suffer by donating to other same goal charities -- and maybe the trampling of our country's treasured private property rights and the right to be left alone will subside. PARTICIPANTS National: Smokers Club, Inc. Illinois: Illinois Smokers' Rights Indiana: Indiana Amusement & Music Operators Association www.IAMOA.orgKentucky: Kentucky Licensed Beverage Association Metro Louisville Hospitality Coalition Cambridge Citizens For Smokers' Rights Minnesota: Smoke Out Gary (Minneapolis) http://www.smokeoutgary.orgMinnesota: Minnesotans Against Smoking Bans Fight City Hall York: NYC Citizens Lobbying Against Smoker Harassment http://www.nycclash.comNew York: Taverners United for FairnessNew York: American ArboristNew York: Madison County Chapter of the Independence PartyOhio: Lakewood Hospitality Association Pennsylvania: Pennsylvania Smokers Action Network Tennessee: Yes S.I.R. National: Private citizens

Smokers' rights groups boycotting cancer charitiesMay 12, 2005
Smokers' rights groups boycotting cancer charitiesMay 12, 2005
Smokers' rights groups boycotting cancer charities May 12, 2005
Click here for more media coverage

Sorry, Comments are not available for this article.


Post a Comment

<< Home