CDC links smoking cessation with immortality!!!

Discussion in 'The Soap Box' started by bigtaco, May 4, 2010.

  1. bigtaco

    bigtaco Active Member

    1,791
    10
    38
    a new report by the CDC claims that 400,000 deaths per year could be prevented if americans would just stop smoking. :salute:

    this supposes that the former smokers will NOT die of anything else, EVER. :wall:

    They seek to decrease smoking by:

    A) social engineering through taxation.

    and B) social engineering by limiting places where smoking is permitted.


    if you're not a smoker, hate smokers and/or hate smoking why should you care? because the gov't is removing your right to the pursuit of happiness just because it might kill you... eventually.

    don't forget that a 97 year old man who dies from lung cancer counts as a smoking related death.


    a new law goes into effect in new york state in 2014 drastically limiting and controlling the amount of sodium in prepared foods. the manufacturers aren't likely to make different products for one state so you're right to enjoy good salty food is controlled by new york legislators. not controlled is the amount of salt coming out of the salt shaker. and manufacturers are planning to replace the salt with a chemical alternative containing no sodium.

    we're not even free to choose what we put in our bodies anymore.


    the number one killer of americans remains heart disease.

    if the CDC keeps legislators ears we may actually see a ban on fried food. SERIOUSLY!!! you think i'm joking?

    let's suppose that heart disease, lung disease and kidney disease all "went away" tomorrow. that leaves accidents as the number one killer. next they'll ban cars, motorcycles, planes, boats... anything that hits 35 mph. then they'll outlaw ANY activity that MAY be dangerous. use your imagination and i'm sure that you have at least ONE activity that may induce death. gun shooting would certainly qualify.

    and sitting on the couch doing nothing is why heart disease remains. what are we to do?


    if the goal of the gov't is to REQUIRE that people live long healthy lives, the next logical step is the weed out people with bad "die young" genes from reproducing. negative eugenics all over again. :thumbsup:


    of all the things going on right now, this one strikes me as the most perilous slippery slope we're on with regards to our liberties and freedoms.

    the good news is that i can live forever... as soon as i put down this cigarette. :rofl:
     
  2. manChild_762

    manChild_762 New Member

    440
    1
    0
    tell me really how feel about the subject.. :joker:
     

  3. xthexheadx

    xthexheadx New Member

    1,140
    12
    0
    +1:salute:

    i was upset when the Louisville smoking ban was passed and i've never tried a cigarette, just because i knew they could now turn to other forms of personal freedom and destroy those too.

    consenting adults should have the right to put whatever they want into their bodies. and the other way around. i love salt, fried foods, and dark chocolate:drool:

    i dont like ciggs, so i dont smoke. but the more the gov. has a say in these choices, the less they are choices @ all.

    i really hate people sometimes.
     
  4. rickgonz

    rickgonz Member

    62
    1
    8
    Where do you want to draw the line? Will you un-ban DDT, (Chinese) chemicals in milk, asbestos in cigarette filters (Kent Micronite) and anything that the FDA deems poisonous to people and mice? How about morphine that used to be available over the counter in Paregoric, do you want free production and free choice? Don't forget MJ, and I don't mean Michael Jordan. Meth anyone? I'm being facetious here.

    But seriously, there are a lot of things the government agencies do that is good for the people. Now for those things we seriously don't like, the onus is on us to persuade our representatives in Congress, and to elect those whom we agree with.
     
  5. Syntax360

    Syntax360 Premium Member

    5,073
    13
    0
    Yes, in an instant.
     
  6. socofn

    socofn New Member

    245
    3
    0
    This is one of those arguments that will never end. As a nurse I am glad they are making it harder for people to smoke, and where they can smoke. On the other hand the more control the governemnt has the more they take, and if everyone gets to healthy or safe I will be unemployed.
    I would bring up government agencies like OSHA and the EPA, for the most part they are suppossed to work to keep the American public safe, if even from themselves, on the other the new laws that are enacted everyday take away our liberties even if most people do not see the trees for the forest.
    Not sure where to draw the line??? JP
     
  7. bigtaco

    bigtaco Active Member

    1,791
    10
    38
    it is indeed a slippery slope with valid opinions for and against.

    beyond the philosophical implications of the gov't vs. the individual...

    i really find it offensive that the CDC uses the words "prevent deaths" to justify social engineering. it's biologically impossible to prevent death and of all agencies, the CDC should know better than to use such language.
     
  8. Narsil

    Narsil Premium Member

    1,658
    10
    38
    I've pretty much come to the conclusion that all branches and departments of the government (state and fed) have become nothing more than social engineering mouthpieces, twisting everything for whatever agenda happens to be pushed at the moment.