WHO FCTC: WHO FCTC Page 2

By Jonathan On Jul 5, 2017

Anti-tobacco treaty labelled toothless

Obvious WHO bias

December 01, 2010

The anti-smoker brigade managed to get another scare headline into the news (“Secondhand Smoke Kills 600,000 a Year Worldwide, Study Says,” Nov. 26). Anyone taking time to read the article could quickly dispel the headline and the study. The story quotes a program manager at the World Health Organization’s Tobacco-Free Initiative, “who led the study.” Is this initiative capable of leading an unbiased study when its sole existence is an agenda?

The article also says, “Scientists then estimated … .” That is a misnomer. True scientists measure; “estimated” is not science. When a study is started to produce a specific result, then that study will conclude with the answer sought when estimates are used and nonsupporting data are ignored. The social engineering agenda of the World Health Organization should be exposed for what it is, controlling the masses through fear and fraud.

ROBERT GEHRMANN
Pennsylvania State Coordinator
Citizens Freedom Alliance/Smokers Club International
Crafton

In Flip, World Health Organization Claims Secondhand Smoke Kills
November 29, 2010
By Rush Limbaugh
“Secondhand smoke kills more than 600,000 people worldwide every year, according to a new study. In the first look at the global impact of secondhand smoking, researchers analyzed data from 2004 for 192 countries. They found 40 percent of children and more than 30 percent of non-smoking men and women regularly breathe in secondhand smoke. … The study was paid for by the Swedish National Board of Health and Welfare and Bloomberg Philanthropies. … ‘This helps us understand the real toll of tobacco,’ said Armando Peruga, a program manager at the World Health Organization’s Tobacco-Free Initiative, who led the study. He said the approximately 603,000 deaths from secondhand smoking should be added to the 5.1 million deaths that smoking itself causes every year.”
Okay, now, we have in our archives, in our Essential Stack of Stuff at RushLimbaugh.com we have a World Health Organization study that was suppressed when it came out, but we have it, and I want Koko Jr. to link it on the home page today. World Health Organization did a massive worldwide study of secondhand smoke, and they found it has no impact at all, zilch, zero, nada, and it was suppressed. You can’t find it. We have it, we kept it, we copied it ourselves, not relying on their websites. I mean this is pure bunk. All of this is just a crock. I look at this kind of stuff, this debate’s been going on for 30 years. I don’t know how many people have been around secondhand smoke all their lives. It’s all lies. It’s what the left does. Lies about our lightbulbs, lies about global warming, and now lies about this, all for the express purpose of ending up controlling people’s lives.
That report that I talked about, we first revealed it March 22nd of 2001, secondhand smoke is harmless. “Passive Smoking Doesn’t Cause Cancer — Official.” That’s the headline, and we’ll link to it. It’s in our Essential Stack of Stuff, but we’ll make it prominent on our Web page this afternoon so that you can look it up tonight when you get around to it.

David vs Goliath: Tobacconists Condemn Irresponsibility of W.H.O. Report on Smoking
December 10, 2009
Columbus, GA December 10, 2009 – This week’s report by the World Health Organization regarding global tobacco use drew the ire of the International Premium Cigar & Pipe Retailers, a U.S. based not-for-profit trade association of tobacconists.
The anti-smoking report was issued in Istanbul, Turkey by WHO, a ‘specialized agency’ of the United Nations. The agency receives more funding from the private sector than it does from the UN. Private sector funding of WHO includes pharmaceutical interests, including those that manufacture and sell smoking cessation products and benefit from anti-smoking efforts. WHO does not reveal its funding sources on its website.
“The WHO report is totally without credibility and is filled with wild, unsupportable claims,” said Chris McCalla, legislative director of the IPCPR which represents some 2,000 small businesses that make, distributor or sell premium cigars, pipes, premium tobacco and related accoutrements.
“For us to take on WHO is like David taking on Goliath. We’re not ‘big tobacco’ and our mom-and-pop retail members are just small businesses selling legal products that adults enjoy like fine wine or top-shelf Scotch whiskey,” McCalla said, “but we cannot stand by while WHO makes outlandish and outrageous claims that are an affront to the intelligence of all thinking people,” he said.
McCalla chose not to repeat the controversial WHO claims so as not to give them further coverage. However, he explained that they had to do with alleged health issues related to smoking and secondhand smoke.
“They say there are no safe levels of secondhand smoke, but the Occupational Safety and Health Administration says otherwise,” McCalla explained. “OSHA has, indeed, set safe levels for secondhand smoke and those levels are 25,000 times higher than are found in bars and restaurants.”
Among contributors to WHO is the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation which, despite its support for WHO’s work with preventing and treating malaria, has been criticized by top WHO staffers for not allowing its funding to be more broadly spent.
“It’s all about money and power. WHO should stick to its work monitoring and treating infectious diseases. They certainly don’t know what they are talking about with regards to tobacco usage and smoking against which they suffer from terminal biases. What would you expect from an organization that refuses to hire people who smoke?” said McCalla.
###
Contact:
Tony Tortorici
678/493-0313
tony@tortoricipr.com

WHO report “Passive smoking doesn’t cause cancer “

Because the U.K.’s Telegraph recently removed this official report, CTA has retained a copy on our website for your analysis.

Passive smoking doesn’t cause cancer – official

March 31, 2004
By Victoria Macdonald, Health Correspondent

THE world’s leading health organization has withheld from publication a study which shows that not only might there be no link between passive smoking and lung cancer but that it could even have a protective effect.

The astounding results are set to throw wide open the debate on passive smoking health risks. The World Health Organisation, which commissioned the 12-centre, seven-country European study has failed to make the findings public, and has instead produced only a summary of the results in an internal report.

Despite repeated approaches, nobody at the WHO headquarters in Geneva would comment on the findings last week. At its International Agency for Research on Cancer in Lyon, France, which coordinated the study, a spokesman would say only that the full report had been submitted to a science journal and no publication date had been set.

The findings are certain to be an embarrassment to the WHO, which has spent years and vast sums on anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns. The study is one of the largest ever to look at the link between passive smoking – or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) – and lung cancer, and had been eagerly awaited by medical experts and campaigning groups.

Yet the scientists have found that there was no statistical evidence that passive smoking caused lung cancer. The research compared 650 lung cancer patients with 1,542 healthy people. It looked at people who were married to smokers, worked with smokers, both worked and were married to smokers, and those who grew up with smokers.

The results are consistent with their being no additional risk for a person living or working with a smoker and could be consistent with passive smoke having a protective effect against lung cancer. The summary, seen by The Telegraph, also states: “There was no association between lung cancer risk and ETS exposure during childhood.”

A spokesman for Action on Smoking and Health said the findings “seem rather surprising given the evidence from other major reviews on the subject which have shown a clear association between passive smoking and a number of diseases.” Roy Castle, the jazz musician and television presenter who died from lung cancer in 1994, claimed that he contracted the disease from years of inhaling smoke while performing in pubs and clubs.

A report published in the British Medical Journal last October was hailed by the anti-tobacco lobby as definitive proof when it claimed that non-smokers living with smokers had a 25 per cent risk of developing lung cancer. But yesterday, Dr Chris Proctor, head of science for BAT Industries, the tobacco group, said the findings had to be taken seriously. “If this study cannot find any statistically valid risk you have to ask if there can be any risk at all. “It confirms what we and many other scientists have long believed, that while smoking in public may be annoying to some non-smokers, the science does not show that being around a smoker is a lung-cancer risk.” The WHO study results come at a time when the British Government has made clear its intention to crack down on smoking in thousands of public places, including bars and restaurants.

The Government’s own Scientific Committee on Smoking and Health is also expected to report shortly – possibly in time for this Wednesday’s National No Smoking day – on the hazards of passive smoking.

This report is obviously quite damaging to the “secondhand smoke is a deadly hazard” argument proliferated by the pharmaceutical industry (Nicoderm) funded smoking ban activists; which explains the reason, after years of this story being in the public domain, it was suddenly and inexplicably removed.

Tobacco treaty signers close to adopting measure

By Vinnee Tong
November 21, 2008

NEW YORK—Anti-tobacco activists said Friday that 160 countries that have signed a treaty to curb tobacco use were on the verge of adopting guidelines that say tobacco sellers’ interests conflict with public health.

Representatives of the countries met this week in Durban, South Africa, to determine what role, if any, tobacco companies will take in the implementation of a treaty to prevent or slow tobacco consumption around the world. It was the third such meeting on enforcement of the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control, organized under the World Health Organization.

A Boston-based corporate watchdog group said Friday that the countries had agreed in principle to how the guidelines would be worded and would vote on them Saturday.

Kathy Mulvey, policy director at Corporate Accountability International, said that earlier opposition from China and Japan — which both have a stake in tobacco companies — had dissolved. The section of the treaty in question says, in part, that countries should protect their public health policies from “commercial and other vested interests of the tobacco industry.”

“They provide a roadmap for countries to resist interference by Big Tobacco,” Mulvey said after the meeting wrapped up on Friday.

Mulvey said the treaty’s Article 5.3 establishes that there is “a fundamental conflict of interest between the tobacco industry’s interest and public health.” Tobacco sellers shouldn’t be considered a stakeholder in terms of public health and shouldn’t be making legislative proposals on public health, Mulvey said.

“I think the expertise of companies like ours is important, and we should have a role to play in regulatory issues,” Philip Morris http://finance.boston.com/boston?Page=QUOTE&Ticker;=MO> International Inc. spokesman Mike Pfeil said. He suggested the industry could be particularly helpful in areas such as stopping illicit trade, on fiscal policy and product regulation.

In the U.S., Congress may consider a bill next year that gives the U.S.
Food and Drug Administration the authority to regulate the tobacco industry. No other government agency has had such sweeping oversight.
Altria Group Inc., which until March owned Philip Morris International, has been a leading supporter of the FDA bill.

The global tobacco prevention treaty is designed to reduce the harm associated with tobacco use. The Bush administration has signed it but did not sent it to Congress for ratification, which is required for full participation. Corporate Accountability International spokeswoman Sara Joseph said President-elect Barack Obama had urged the Bush administration to send it to the Senate for a vote in 2005.

Activists said tobacco prevention efforts abroad were being stymied by interference from state-owned tobacco companies in Japan and China as well as the major public companies that sell cigarettes around the world. Philip Morris International, the largest non-governmental cigarette maker in the world, has a partnership with the state-owned China National Tobacco Corp.

New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg has been a prominent supporter of tobacco prevention. And his efforts got a boost in July, when Bill Gates pledged additional financial support. Together they have given $375 million to a global effort to cut smoking, $250 million from Bloomberg Philanthropies and $125 million from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.

The money will be used on efforts to raise tobacco taxes, help smokers quit, ban tobacco advertising and protect nonsmokers from exposure to smoke. It will also aid efforts to track tobacco use and better understand tobacco control strategies.

At the time of the announcement, Gates said Africa was an area of particular interest.

“The epidemic in Africa is not well advanced, and that means that we can catch it at an early stage,” he said at an event in New York.