Tobacco control reacts to an inconvenient truth about smoking and Covid-19
Friday, April 24, 2020 at 20:21 Evidence that smokers may not be at greater risk and may even be protected from Covid-19 has thrown the cat among the public health pigeons.
On Wednesday, within hours of the Guardian reporting that 'French researchers are planning to test nicotine patches on coronavirus patients and frontline health workers after a study suggested smokers may be much less at risk of contracting the virus', tobacco control 'experts' were frantically coming up with their own hypotheses.
One suggested that:
The observed lower than expected prevalence of smokers among hospitalised Covid-19 patients could be due to reverse causality or low reporting of smoking (my emphasis).
Yesterday, following the publication of 'The association of smoking status with SARS-CoV-2 infection, hospitalisation and mortality from COVID-19: A living rapid evidence review', another tweeted:
In 28 studies, poor recording of smoking status (my emphasis) means the association of current/former smoking with #COVID19 infection, hospitalisation or mortality is unclear.
I definitely detect the start of a theme.
If we are not careful an inconvenient truth will be dismissed by public health professionals who will try to argue that many more smokers were hospitalised or critically ill as a result of Covid-19 but they either hid the fact that they smoke or they weren’t asked and no records were kept.
Alternatively tobacco control activists will simply ignore the mounting evidence that doesn’t fit their anti-smoking agenda.
I’ve lost count of the number of times ASH has tweeted something to the effect that 'Smoking makes the impact of Covid-19 worse'.
Also on permanent loop is health secretary Matt Hancock's statement – which he made on March 16 in answer to a question by Bob Blackman, chairman of the ASH-run APPG on Smoking and Health – that “it is abundantly clear that smoking makes the impact of coronavirus worse.”
On current evidence neither claim appears to be true but that doesn't seem to bother ASH, and why should it? They're lobbyists not scientists, although there are plenty of lobbyists masquerading as scientists within the public health industry.
Last night however came the sound of screeching brakes and the smell of burning rubber. Responding to the reports coming out of France, ASH CEO Deborah Arnott commented:
“This should encourage smokers to use nicotine to help them quit and stay quit. Smokers are much more likely to succeed if they use other forms of nicotine, e.g. patches, gum and e-cigarettes, all of which are much less harmful than smoking.”
See what she did there?
Shameless doesn't come close to describing ASH’s behaviour which is why this tweet, posted at 10:22 this morning, was equally predictable:
That’s right, despite all the evidence to the contrary, ASH is sticking like glue to the claim that smokers are at greater risk from coronavirus.
With that in mind I would love to be a fly on the wall when ASH hosts a webinar on May 7 'for local authority public health professionals and councillors on the importance of tobacco control as part of local Covid-19 strategies'.
If any open-minded councillors would care to take part and report back, please drop me a note.
Reader Comments (9)
"...or low reporting of smoking..."
Didn't we have a similar sampling problem with victims of lung problems regarding vitamin E acetate and THC somewhat recently?
Or has CV-19 caused some, somewhat more, selective amnesia among the #FunSponge crowd?
Enquiring minds, etc.
ASH are meeting with politicians on May 7th? Surely politicians can now see that Tobacco Control is a mute point with COVID on the agenda. Funding TC needs to be redirected to fighting COVID. ASH should advise non-smokers to use Nicotine Patches to protect against COVID. There is no proof that COVID is harder on smokers.
It's time ASH's nonsense ended.
Nicotine patches were based on Green Tobacco Sickness by a never smoker. Dermal exposure to raw nicotine in tobacco harvesters without protective equipment.
"Green tobacco sickness (GTS) is an illness resulting from dermal exposure to dissolved nicotine from wet tobacco leaves; it is characterized by nausea, vomiting, weakness, and dizziness and sometimes fluctuations in blood pressure or heart rate "
Which the inventor of the nicotine patch mistook for the effects of smoking.
Nicotine patches may boost intensive care risk
2006
"The team examined the intensive care records of 224 smokers, half of which received NRT, mostly via skin patches.
Surprisingly, they found that 18 of the patients on NRT died, compared with just three of the smokers that did not receive nicotine. Also, the average duration of an ICU stay for patients given nicotine was 24.4 hours, about 2 hours longer than their cold-turkey counterparts.
“We have to be aware that we may be doing some harm [by giving patients NRT],” Afessa warns."
https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn10380-nicotine-patches-may-boost-intensive-care-risk/
Non-smokers are in enough danger already lets not make it worse.
Links on request, Simon.
Based on the scam of passive smoking, ASH knows that they only have to tell a lie repetitively enough while completely ignoring facts for it to become truth. They are doubling down on the lie, probably in fear of losing finding when cuts have to be made when all this over.
They promote prejudice that smokers are lesser humans with dirty lungs and revolting hearts so weak that they could not survive getting a cold never mind the worst flu that humans have seen since 1918. I can even remember bill boards up in my city claiming the bloof of a smoker is not like any other human's and allegedly has lumps in it. Cut me and my blood flows the same as others.
I hope councils do come out of their tobacco control and smoker hating bunkers but after spending several days in dispute with York City Council that was not just stating as fact that smokers are 14 times more likely to get Covid, the council also implied that non smokers could get Covid from passive smoking too, it's clear they cling to what they're fed..
It is obvious that councils like this are happy to keep spreading fake news when it suits them but what is incredible is that people commenting there in support of the council actually don't see smokers as human beings at all.
ASH is a hate group and has done a marvelous job over the last decade to dehumanise, demonise, and create the belief that smokers are nothing more than selfish scum so drug addicted they will seek out others' children with the express purpose of killing them.
ASH encourages social divisions and lying as long as it can result in hatred, fear and loathing of people who smoke. ASH must be defunded.
As for the studies - how do they know it is the nicotine? What will they do if they find it is actually something else in the smoke? I see how ASH and vaping stooges like Linda Bauld and Clive Bates are pushing the nicotine aspect but that's probably because they want to force smokers to vape. ASH is accepting vapng now because it is a fantastic new weapon to beat smokers up with but one wonders further down the line when that made up or manipulated study is invented to show vapers are just as scummy as smokers and like us want to kill the world too.
Each to their own but I do not want to fill my lungs with the vaping chem cloud. I have been filling my lungs with organic tobacco for 52 years now - almost a whole lifetime - with no harmful effects - sorry about that inconvenient truth too, and I will continue doing it until I decide I no longer want to.
While being forced to quit almost every day by some new bullying social exclusion, restriction, price hike, or product tinkering, I have come to realise that the only choice that is actually still mine to make is to smoke. The choice to quit is not choice but force.
When we are free, treated equally in social, employment, health and housing situations and the punishment for being a smoker ends, then is the time to consider whether or not to keep smoking based on my choice and not that forced on me by the bullies at ASH.
To Rose: Current Nicotine Patches are designed for smokers. ASH should work with the Drug companies to make a patch safe for non-smokers protection against COVID.
To Pat: I too have smoked tobacco (heavily) for over 50 years. No ill effects ever to me or anyone around me (including 20 child relatives). ASH and TC are redundant now with COVID
Pat
Nitric oxide inhibits the replication cycle of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus.
2005
"Nitric oxide (NO) is an important signaling molecule between cells which has been shown to have an inhibitory effect on some virus infections. The purpose of this study was to examine whether NO inhibits the replication cycle of the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus (SARS CoV) in vitro. We found that an organic NO donor, S-nitroso-N-acetylpenicillamine, significantly inhibited the replication cycle of SARS CoV in a concentration-dependent manner. We also show here that NO inhibits viral protein and RNA synthesis. Furthermore, we demonstrate that NO generated by inducible nitric oxide synthase, an enzyme that produces NO, inhibits the SARS CoV replication cycle."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15650225
What is the role of nitric oxide in the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)?
"Published findings from the 2004 SARS-CoV infection suggest the potential role of inhaled nitric oxide (iNO; Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, plc) as a supportive measure for treating infection in patients with pulmonary complications. Treatment with iNO reversed pulmonary hypertension, improved severe hypoxia, and shortened the length of ventilatory support compared with matched control patients with SARS.
A phase 2 study of iNO is underway in patients with COVID-19 with the goal of preventing disease progression in those with severe ARDS.
The Society of Critical Care Medicine recommends against the routine use of iNO in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia. Instead, they suggest a trial only in mechanically ventilated patients with severe ARDS and hypoxemia despite other rescue strategies. The cost of iNO is reported as exceeding $100/hour."
https://www.medscape.com/answers/2500114-197460/what-is-the-role-of-nitric-oxide-in-the-treatment-of-coronavirus-disease-2019-covid-19
But it comes for free with a cigarette once you light it.
The trouble with tobacco is that as a natural plant you can't patent it and make a fortune, you can only patent the delivery device, as they did with patches.
All tobacco control funding must be suspended and redirected toward addressing infectious diseases. This would help address the current pandemic and assist in the mitigation of future emerging infectious diseases.
The ideological attack on so-called 'lifestyle diseases' has eroded the global ability to effectively respond to infectious diseases in order to sustain the persecution of smokers and drive large profits into the hands of tobacco control activists. De-fund tobacco control now.
How true Vinny.
WHO LAUNCHES PARTNERSHIP WITH THE PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRY TO HELP SMOKERS QUIT
30 January 1999
"DAVOS. - Calling tobacco a "main risk factor" to health in the next century, World Health Organization Director-General Dr Gro Harlem Brundtland announced a major project to help smokers in Europe, Russia and the Central Asian Republics stop smoking in a speech at the World economic Forum.
"By 2020, the burden of disease attributable to tobacco is expected to outweigh that caused by any single other disease," Dr Brundtland said.
The WHO European Partnership Project on Tobacco Dependence is being set up with the objective of reducing tobacco related death and disease among smokers. The Partnership Project, which is open to both private, non-commercial and public sector partners, will support implementation of the key strategic goals of the World Health Organization's Tobacco Free Initiative.
The strength of the Partnership Project lies in the fact that it has brought together three major pharmaceutical companies, Glaxo Wellcome, Novartis Consumer Health and Pharmacia & Upjohn, all manufacturers of treatment products for tobacco dependence, to support a common goal that will have a significant impact on public health."
https://web.archive.org/web/20030211043229/http://www.who.int/inf-pr-1999/en/pr99-04.html
It certainly has.
WHO Europe evidence based recommendations on the treatment of tobacco dependence
2002
“This was a three year project, funded largely by three pharmaceutical companies that manufacture treatment products for tobacco dependence, but managed by WHO Europe and a steering group which included government representatives and many public sector organisations. The project focused on five areas: tracking smokers’ behaviour and intention to change; the regulation of tobacco products and tobacco dependence treatment products; smoke free places and workplace policies; the implementation of evidence based treatment; and communicating the health messages about stopping smoking.”
“They were commissioned by the World Health Organization and have drawn on the experience of a number of European countries, including the four original target countries of the partnership project: France, Germany, Poland, and the UK. They were discussed in two European WHO meetings on evidence based treatment, in London in November 1999 and in Barcelona in October 2000, and revised in the light of feedback following those meetings”
http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/11/1/44.full
Oh what a tangled web we we've.
Btw, Simon, I thought vaping adverts on TV were banned so how come the new Voke product, licensed as a medicine by the Department of Health is exempt? Oh yes, that'll be it. If Big Pharma owns it, we can have it.
Soon, vapers including those with businesses dependant on vaping connosuiers will find the only product approved for use will this be one https://www.voke.com/
As we said all along. It is not about health but politcs. When ASH urges people to use ecigsrettes, they mean this one.