Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier
B.A. Ware: The issue of private property was a subject which I addressed on this thread a couple of days ago. (posting 426}
|
I think the number you have qouted is your post number which changes every time you post the, post number is on the top right of your post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier
At the moment very important Bills is going through Parliament. Changes in abortion time-limits and Stem Cell Research. Putting aside any moral objections which some people may have, both sides are presenting distinguished medical opinion in support of their respective cases. Both sides are claiming that their opponents scientific reasearch is flawed. Let us hope that the best available course of action will finally emerge. But whatever is decided, it will be decided by laymen (in the main) who have access to scientific opinion. That must always be the case in a Sovereign Parliament.
|
The example you give is a good analogy of why the smoking ban is wrong. Like the ban abortion is an emotive subject which people will already have Pre-conceived ideas about especially religious people and I'm pretty sure MPs will get a free vote on this and as many of them claim to be religious they will not take a blind bit of notice of the science.
Also if you are going to look at the science you also have to look at who is presenting the science take a look at the list of groups who gave written evidence to the SCOTH committee, here are but a few.
The Royal Society for the Promotion of Health
Action on Smoking and Health
Heart of Mersey
British Heart Foundation
The Health Foundation
Children’s Food Bill Campaign
Child Health Advocacy Network
Socialist Health Association
Royal College of Physicians
British Lung Foundation
Smoking Control Network
Cancer Research UK
The Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation
Smoke Free Liverpool
British Medical Association
Smoke Free Cities and Communities Network
Asthma UK
Then you should look at the committee itself a committee of medically qualified personnel three of which have served on the Board of ASH one being the chairman hardly a ringing endorsement of impartiality.
Then you have to look at the science which produces a relative risk of 1.25 which is statistically insignificant.(links can be provided).
What you end up with is a load of hysterical people like John Cooper ranting and raving about something that is no more harmful than a cup of coffee just because he has been brainwashed by media bias and disinformation which has been promoted by the anti-smoking lobby for years, but hey its easier to believe than to find out the truth.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoffrey Collier
If you are not happy; protest, seek changes, in short, employ the democratic process.
|
I have written to 70 MPs guess what the response was?