08-12-2025, 02:44 PM
(08-11-2025, 10:52 PM)annonentity Wrote: The lack of critical thinking in this matter is pretty big. You have to ask Why Monsanto would pay an antismoking activist over a thousand dollars a day back in ninety eighties, to say smoking was the cause of most illness, but at the same time having to pay people to say that their products like agent orange were safe and effective. It might be a bit of a hike for most people after they have been targeted and propagandized to realize that they might just have been fooled a little bit.
Take a study done by a PHD on behalf of an insurance company to prove that smoking mothers put their unborn babies at risk, why it is almost child abuse...but the outcome was that the smoking mothers had a significantly better outcome for their babies for various reasons, this was shelved simply because the insurance companies have to do what the government says. It did not fit the agenda which is smoking is the scapegoat for the greater pollution for profit. They know when atmospheric testing was conducted it was going to kill a massive amount of the unlucky souls who breathed in that random radio active particle, the irony is that a smoke would have more protection because of the mucous shield. Have a read if you can be bothered.......The Health & Wellness Show: The Truth About Tobacco with Richard White — Health & Wellness — Sott.net
So a grand conspiracy with Monsanto, insurance companies, and the government all sitting in a smoke-filled room plotting to make cigarettes look bad? LoL
Distract from radioactive fallout?
Oh dear.
The "smoking mothers have healthier babies" claim has been debunked repeatedly.
Maternal smoking increases risks of low birth weight, stillbirth, and developmental issues.
Agent Orange being "safe" was propaganda, but that doesn't make tobacco smoke suddenly beneficial.
And no, cigarette tar isn't some magical anti-radiation shield, it's just a sticky carcinogenic mess.
This is less whistleblowing and more YouTube rabbit hole fanfiction dressed up as "critical thinking."
Try actual peer-reviewed science next time.
"Yet so it is, we see the illiterate bulk of mankind that walk the high-road of plain common sense, and are governed by the dictates of nature, for the most part easy and undisturbed. To them nothing that is familiar appears unaccountable or difficult to comprehend."
