Three for Three

Or - "We're all smokers now"

Somebody has really been pulling out the stops this week, to promote the Nanny State in our local newspaper

On Monday the target was smokers:
Smoking rates in East Lancashire among highest in the country
SMOKING rates in East Lancashire are still some of the highest in the country.
New data released by the Office for National Statistics and Public Health England have revealed the top 10 local authorities in England where men and women smoke the most and least.
Two East Lancashire authorities have been named in the top 10 local authorities with the highest smoking rates for men and women.
Oh well, somebody has to be above the national average, may as well be us. But as Chris Snowdon tells us, the yearly decline in smoking has finally levelled out, possibly to do with the introduction of plain packaging. Maybe we've reached a point where the remaining smokers no longer do what they're told and the emerging smokers have been desensitised to all the hype?

If that's the case, why not spend more taxpayers money on more of the same?
Since last year Lancashire County Council has been working with Lancashire Care NHS Foundation Trust and commissioned the creation of a Quit Squad to discourage people from smoking.
Quit Squad encourages people to stop smoking and support for pregnant women to quit. A smokefree initiative has also been set up to help protect people from the effects of second-hand smoke.
Not just to provide assistance to smokers who want to quit, but to discourage smokers from smoking, if they want discouraging or not
And what the hell is a 'Quit Squad'? Why must everything be presented as though it's aimed at children in the playground, these days?
The data was analysed by bosses at E-cigarette retailer
Is anyone else getting pissed off with vape peddlers joining the anti-tobacco bandwagon?
“This suggests it isn’t necessarily triggered by any one factor, such as employment or education, but choice.
So no problem then? Nothing to see here? Of course not
Perhaps more needs to be done in these areas
Perhaps you've done enough?

So that was Monday. Tuesday the target was fat people:
REVEALED: Three East Lancs boroughs named among worst in the country for takeaways
BLACKBURN with Darwen has lost its unwanted crown of ‘takeaway capital of England’ but it is still among the worst in England for its number of fast food outlets.
The borough, along with Burnley and Hyndburn, features high up the list published by Public Health England.
Public Health England again. But looking to Chris Snowdon again for the facts, living near a take-away does not make you fat. But we don't need reams of evidence and statistics to figure that one out, do we? Businesses only open if there is demand. An increase in take-aways, must therefore follow an increase in demand, not the other way around. Also, no fast food joint I've ever known, has ever forced people to go in there and buy food
Around two thirds of adults in the borough are classified as either overweight or obese.
Strangely enough, 'Classed as', does not mean 'Is'. All you have to do is go outside and open your eyes, to see that nowhere near two thirds of the local residents are obese. If I was to bet money on it, I would say the true figure is closer to 6% than 60
Cllr Brian Taylor, executive member for health and adult social care at Blackburn with Darwen Council, said: “The increased availability of high sugar and high fat products is a growing national challenge and in 2016 we adopted a planning policy which restricts the number fast food outlets within 400 metres of nurseries, schools, madrassas and colleges.
Brian Taylor is one of our local Nannies. The concept of personal responsibility is beyond him, so now my access to local businesses is restricted because a small minority of people do not know how to take care of themselves

Which brings us to todays story press release. Alkies:
'Horrifying' numbers treated for alcohol-related liver disease at Blackburn A and E
Horrifying! Truly terrible! Do you want to know what the horrifying number is? Let's take a look through the crazy window
DOCTORS treated 59 patients for alcohol-related liver disease last year, according to NHS figures.
That's a rate of 46 for every 100,000 people registered in the area, 51% up from five years ago.
46 people out of every 100k. Up from 23 in the last five years. Anyone who can describe those figures as anything other than a complete non-event, must work for Public Health England
The rate for the whole of England is 26 for every 100,000 people.
26 people. Absolutely nothing to see here, right? Wrong
Professor Roger Williams, director of the Institute of Hepatology, said the statistics for England were "horrifying" and proposed setting a minimum price per unit of alcohol to curb drinking.
Make millions of people across the country pay more for their booze in order to have a negligable health effect on 26 of them. You really would have to be stark raving bonkers, but this is the Public Health Industry and that's what they've become
More people drink at home
Do you wonder why?

You know what annoys me most about all this? It's not that Public Health England come out with all this tripe with regular monotony. That's how they shovel up taxpayers money, so it's only to be expected. Their nose would be soon out of the trough if they told us there was nothing to worry about.

It's not even the Government who listen to these tax sponging imbeciles and implement their proposals. They're a bunch of elitist sponging control freaks, so it's only to be expected too. They would also have a bit of a problem if there was nothing to worry about and we had no need of a Government to protect us

What annoys me the most, is how easily the general public swallow this up and demand something be done. The population is so gullible it's unbelievable.

Take a look in the comments:


Lionheart134 2nd July 8:30 am
So, maybe they can put some cash aside to pay for their high dependency on health & social care in later life to compensate. Don't trot out that old chestnut about smokers' taxes propping up the NHS, it's just not true.

Really Easy 2nd July 12:18 pm
cigarettes are fine if you don't mind having 4,000 chemicals, including 43 known cancer-causing (carcinogenic) compounds and 400 other toxins. These cigarette ingredients include nicotine, tar, and carbon monoxide, as well as formaldehyde, ammonia, hydrogen cyanide, arsenic, and DDT. Nicotine is highly addictive.

boynesider 2nd July 12:30 pm
Tell that to the Roy Castle Foundation

thornintheside0 2nd July 5:48 pm
Are you employed by the tobacco companies? you must be to come out with barely believable fairytales that you have conjured up to convince yourself that smoking's fine. All properly investigated surveys i.e. not ones sponsored by tobacco companies prove that smoking cigarettes is harmful to your health. Whether its passive (remember the bad old days when after night out you stunk of stale fags?) or you actively smoke. You choose to ignore all that and will be telling us next that the world is flat and its only the liberal lefties making the earth is round nonsense to charge you more for your travel (if you can afford it what with the present price of ciggies). Oh and you are allowed an unwise decision just like your mother did when she said 'yes' to your dad.


Pendle Bill 3rd July 7:40 am
With respect, it IS the Government's business to do what it can to ensure that the public stays alive, safe and healthy!

Excluded again 3rd July 7:51 am
The NHS is under huge cost pressures. Many of the diseases it has to treat are due to unhealthy lifestyle choices. The NHS would save a lot of money if most people adopted a healthier lifestyle - which very much makes this the government's business.

Aidan Abett 3rd July 8:57 am
By your logic, the government shouldn't have introduced the breathalyser or the seat belt law.
Of course the government had to introduce that legislation because too many people are too stupid to know what's good for them or bad for them (millions of them voted to voluntarily impoverish the nation just two years ago as an example of this).

The vitriol against fatties wasn't as bad as it was against the smokers. Many of the commenters needed to leave room for a sustained attack on the brown people who run most of the fast food outlets in the area

And today

eddyo 2 hrs ago
With your attitude the NHS is on borrowed time. It is fine to abuse your own body, who cares unless you are dolally? But why should others pay for your free-loading attitude and likely health issues brought on by your lifestyle? Fat, boozing smokers with heart, lung and dreaded c conditions that 8 times out of 10 will arise. Oh, you've 'paid in' ****. Yeah, all 50,000 worth, which is how much healthcare costs you should be 'entitled to' before you start paying. And if you don't have the top- up money? You do with out - as we all should do.

thirdeyevision 2 hrs ago
ban alcohol

Only a couple for today yet, but it was only published this morning. Give it time

If this is the level of support Public Health England has for it's denormalisation process of Smokers, fat folk and drinkers, everyone is pretty much fucked, because as us smokers have been saying for a log time now, "One day, they're coming for you"


Barman said...

Bucko said...

Barman said...

Bucko said...