Forest’s first online meeting and I’m nervous as hell

This evening we are hosting Forest’s very first online meeting.

If I’m nervous it’s because I have every reason to be.

Last week Rob Lyons, who is in charge of the event, suggested I log in to a similar event he was hosting for the Academy of Ideas.

“I think it might be worth joining the discussion I’m doing on Thursday night,” he said.

“We've got over 120 people coming, so I'm bricking it a bit, but it might be worth registering and 'attending' to see how it works.”

So that’s what I did.

Unfortunately it was a complete disaster! Not the meeting, which seemed to go very well, but my attempt to participate.

Zoom is a doddle to download so that wasn’t an issue. The problems arose after I had successfully logged in to the meeting.

I could see all the other attendees but when the meeting started and Rob began talking the sound was a bit muffled.

After ten minutes I began getting messages on my screen warning me of an "unstable Internet connection". Generally we have a pretty good connection at home, well able to handle Netflix etc.

The connection then started cutting in and out. I checked that no-one else in the house was on Netflix, in case that was using up bandwidth.

I then logged out intending to log in again and reboot but I couldn’t log back in because there were now 100 guests in the meeting and that was maximum allowed by the software.

Twenty minutes later I did manage to rejoin the meeting (one or two people must have left) but the connection continued to cut out and it became so frustrating that I gave up long before the end.

When I explained this to Rob later his reply didn’t fill me with confidence.

“I had a total nightmare the first time I did a Zoom event. The problem was the speaker's audio and video would slow to a crawl, making them like unintelligible daleks.

“If he hadn't sent me his speech in advance I would have been completely lost. I had terrible problems that week, but it all seems to have settled down. Fingers crossed etc.”

Helpfully he added:

“I would make sure to be as close to the router as you can be. The more floors and walls in between, the worse it gets. Make sure it's not on the ground and can be kept clear of any cordless phones. That may help too.”

Dear reader, do you see why I’m nervous?

Most of the guests are from the UK, as you would expect, but the list also includes people from Ireland, Germany, Belgium and America.

If I haven’t put you off it’s not too late to join us. To register email events@forestonline.org and we will send you the link you need to join the meeting.

Smokers and non-smokers welcome!

In plain English? ‘There’s something weird going on’

I've been following developments but I don't pretend to know exactly what’s happening with smoking and Covid-19.

I don't think anyone does, not with any degree of conviction.

I am grateful therefore to anyone who can explain the emerging evidence in plain English. Two articles that did just that were published online yesterday.

One (Smoking Increases Covid-19 Risk... Right?) was published on the MedPage Today website. Jason Kidde, a physician assistant at University of Utah Health, wrote:

The FDA and WHO have both made statements that smoking may increase both the risk of Covid-19 as well as severity. This assertion of risk, however, is rooted in expectation rather than data. Meanwhile, the available studies show an unanticipated protective effect on Covid-19 incidence in smokers and a less clear association with disease severity.

What follows is a useful summary of recent research including the study from France that found that 'Daily smokers accounted for 4.4% to 5.3% of all Covid-19 infections, which compares to 25.4% of the overall French population who smoke' although it also noted 'an increase in the proportion of smokers with severe illness'.

It was the latter finding that appears to have fuelled ASH’s Twitter feed last week. In a series of rotating tweets, the anti-smoking group declared, without a hint of doubt:

• Smoking makes the impact of #COVID19 worse.
• Smokers are at greater risk of severe symptoms from COVID-19

Kidde however is clear that this was not the principal message to take from the French study. The authors, he pointed out:

... did not mince words in their conclusion which "strongly suggests that daily smokers have a very much lower probability of developing symptomatic or severe SARS-CoV-2 infection as compared to the general population."

Significantly he concluded:

It is only natural that we jumped to what looks like the premature conclusion that smoking would result in increased Covid-19 incidence. The premise makes perfect sense, but we cannot ignore the data and continue to report this as an unfounded risk factor rooted in bias.

The second article, written by pharmacist Terry Maguire, was published on the Slugger O'Toole website and asked, 'Does Smoking Prevent Covid-19 or is it a myth?'

Covering similar ground to Jason Kidde, Maguire wrote:

A French study published last week identified an interesting relationship between smoking and contracting Covid-19. If you are a smoker you are much less likely to end up in A&E or be admitted to ICU due to Covid-19.

This finding, from this good quality study, is of particular interest since smoking was, from the early stages of the infection, identified as a major risk factor for poorer outcomes in Covid-19.

However, Chinese researches noticed early on that smokers were less likely to end up in A&E or be admitted to ICU and did publish some studies suggesting this counter intuitive fact. Only 12% of Chinese infections in ICU were smokers in a population where 52% of males are smokers. These studies were weak as many of the Covid-19 patients did not have a proper smoking status assigned.

An American study confirmed the findings but again there was significant problems with the data. So the French group, working in Paris and studying a cohort of Parisenns, in March and early April trying to ensure robust data on smoking status, covid-19 status and the degree of illness. From nearly 500 Covid-19 patients who went to A&E or were hospitalised and ended up in ICU, they found that only around 5% were daily smokers compared to the French public with a smoking prevalence of some 25%.

If you're confused or surprised by any of this I don’t blame you. After all, the public is programmed to believe there’s nothing remotely positive about smoking.

The idea that smoking - or the nicotine in tobacco - might ‘protect’ some smokers from the virus is anathema to the public health industry.

But don't worry. Even the nation’s biggest scientific brains are struggling to explain the data.

Linda Bauld, professor of public health at Edinburgh University and a leading tobacco control expert, summed it up best when she told Good Morning Britain:

“There’s something weird going on with smokers and coronavirus.”

Full marks to Bauld for her candour.

Contrast that with ASH and Public Health England. While ASH continues to pump out relentless anti-smoking propaganda (there are none so certain of the ‘truth’ than tobacco control lobbyists), PHE has gone very quiet on the subject since declaring, four weeks ago, that smokers with Covid-19 are ‘14 times more likely to develop severe respiratory disease’.

A substantial amount of data has been published since PHE’s claim echoed around the world, none of it supporting that headline-grabbing statement which was based on a single, very small study from China, yet PHE has chosen neither to amend its ‘story’ nor comment on the latest research. I wonder why.

Hopefully we will have more information soon. In the meantime I suggest all interested parties should step back, stop rushing to judgement, and focus on the overall evidence.

I’ll keep you posted.

Update: The Mail Online has just reported, More evidence smoking may cut the risk of coronavirus.

Coronavirus: the news media is conspiring in its own demise

A poll published last week should have made disturbing reading for the news media.

But they live in such a bubble I'm not sure they will care.

Asked by YouGov who they trusted most on coronavirus, 1652 Britons gave a huge thumbs up to the NHS, followed by chief medical officer Chris Whitty and PM Boris Johnson who was still recovering at Chequers when the poll was conducted.

In contrast an overwhelmingly negative reaction was recorded against 'TV journalists' and 'newspapers'.

I'm firmly in that camp too. In fact I've stopped watching the TV news and I only read the papers for non-coronavirus reports.

The single news programme I still listen to on the radio is PM with Evan Davis on Radio 4. At least Davis sounds like he is listening, not waiting to jump in and interrupt or accuse the government of another crime or misdemeanour.

Although I suspect most things will return, sooner or later, to 'normal' (they usually do), the relentless negativity of journalists and broadcasters throughout this period has, I am sure, inflicted permanent damage to our arrogant, out-of-touch media ‘elite’.

I am sorry to write that because I grew up wanting to be journalist, got side-tracked into public relations, then worked for 15 years as a freelance journalist editing several in-house magazines.

I still have a fascination for newspapers and love reading the memoirs of some of the great Fleet Street journalists, most of them now dead, but the behaviour of the media in relation to the present crisis has been abominable.

I mention this because I was struck by a message that was posted on Facebook over the weekend by one of my FB 'friends' who lives in a neighbouring village.

To put this in perspective, most of his posts are about football. Less frequently he posts information that may be helpful to other local residents.

I can't remember him ever posting anything 'political' until Saturday when he wrote:

A message to all our negative UK press - including Laura Kuenssberg of the BBC, Robert Peston of ITV, Beth Rigby of Sky, Piers Morgan of ITV, BBC News in general and all the other negative UK press.

Journalism is missing the "mood" in this great country of ours - the United Kingdom. We do not want or need blame. We do not want constant criticism of our Government who are doing their very best in a very difficult and unprecedented global emergency.

We want and need a constructive contribution to the national effort to help us out of this crisis. We need hope, optimism and faith, with less negativity and more positive support from these journalists. It is time you all changed your negative and political rhetoric for the health of this nation and start supporting our Government.

No-one speaks for the entire nation but that post speaks for millions, I'm sure.

The question is, how can editors and broadcasters be so out of touch with their audience?

It's a mystery.

At home with ... James Dreyfus

Another addition to Dan Donovan’s smoking at home photo gallery.

Actor James Dreyfus is probably best known for his starring roles in two television sitcoms, Ben Elton’s The Thin Blue Line, and Gimme Gimme Gimme with Kathy Burke.

Responding to a request for a picture, James sent this. To view the current gallery click here.

At home with ... Ranald Macdonald

Love these photos of Boisdale MD Ranald Macdonald.

They were submitted for inclusion on Dan Donovan’s smoking at home website.

The photo below was accepted, the one above was excluded because it’s not Ranald’s home (much as he would like it to be)!

To submit a photo of yourself, or simply view the online gallery as it looks after 48 hours, click here.

Tobacco control reacts to an inconvenient truth about smoking and Covid-19

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.

Face masks? No, thanks

An MP rang me yesterday.

He left a message saying he needed 30 seconds of my time. I called him back. It turned out his call to me was a mistake.

He had intended to ring a fellow MP, Simon Clarke, but got the numbers mixed up and rang me instead.

We nevertheless chatted for several minutes and I took the opportunity to lobby for an easing of the current restrictions.

“I don’t understand,” I said, “why garden centres can’t be open, like supermarkets.

“There has to be light at the end of the tunnel," I added, "and a gradual easing of restrictions would give people hope.”

He agreed.

However, I said, the one issue that might turn me against the government was being forced to wear a face mask.

If people want to do it voluntarily, fine, but making it impossible to shop or go out without a mask would be a step too far.

Thankfully, according to today's Telegraph:

The public are expected to be told that wearing face masks when they leave their homes will not be compulsory when the Government publishes its official advice. 

We all know, though, that decisions can be changed and even reversed overnight so who knows what will happen.

My guess is that, if more and more people start wearing face masks - in shops especially - so that it becomes the norm, the pressure to wear one will build to the point that most people will succumb to social pressure.

After all, imagine walking down a supermarket aisle and being the only person without a mask. It would take a strong or thick-skinned person to stick to their guns in those circumstances.

Anyway, my MP caller seemed to agree with me on that as well. He also suggested we meet for a drink when the pandemic is over.

A drink? In public? That'll be the day.

Dan Donovan’s new photo project

Pleased to report the launch of Dan Donovan’s new photo project.

Dan writes:

The calming pleasure of sitting down with a rolled cigarette and a coffee, or maybe a whisky, has become an essential part of my life. I can reflect, focus, enjoy solitude or company in those moments as I put flame to my tobacco. My mental health is all the better for it. The social restrictions and smoking legislation we now live under mean that the only place I can truly enjoy smoking indoors is in my home.

Throughout this ‘lockdown’ period, when everyone is experiencing social restriction and isolation as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, I know smokers will be finding comfort in their pastime. By way of bringing together those who share my love of tobacco I have created this website, inviting others to join me in submitting a photo of themselves smoking at home or in their garden. This isn’t about making a statement but more about embracing a community that is already familiar with social isolation.

To visit the site click here.