panaceachronicles

Very likely yes. Please read on.

What did doctors 150 years ago know that could immediately begin making a big difference in the lives of COVID victims?

It’s simply this. They knew that Coca Leaf tea is a well-established and solidly proven treatment, and in some cases a cure, for every one of the symptoms of other diseases that are now, these days, also the primary symptoms of Long Haul COVID. So aren’t we treating Long Haul COVID worldwide with Coca Leaf tea? Why aren’t we at least trying it?

Here’s what our beloved CDC has to say about Long COVID:

“Long COVID is a range of symptoms that can last weeks or months after first being infected with the virus that causes COVID-19 or can appear weeks after infection. Long COVID can happen to anyone who has had COVID-19, even if the illness was mild, or they had no symptoms. 

“People with long COVID report experiencing different combinations of the following symptoms:

Tiredness or fatigue

Difficulty thinking or concentrating (aka “brain fog”)

Headache

Loss of smell or taste

Dizziness on standing

Fast-beating or pounding heart (aka heart palpitations)

Chest pain

Difficulty breathing or shortness of breath

Cough

Joint or muscle pain

Depression or anxiety

Fever

Symptoms that get worse after physical or mental activities

Every single one of these CDC-designated symptoms of “Long Haul COVID” are symptoms that thousands of doctors in the US and Europe treated successfully every day in the 1800s with Coca Leaf tonics and teas. No Big Pharma needed – just the leaves of the Coca plant and a teapot. And notice I said “treated successfully”, not “healed” – although there are plenty of medical records of that too. Bottom line – generations of people suffering from diseases and “conditions” exactly the same as Long COVID were treated successfully with Coca Tea. 

Somehow all that information has disappeared. Where has it ever been taught in schools. Where does it exist anywhere in our social media or our entertainment? The slate has been wiped clean – almost. 

That historical record is real, and it exists, and once you even glance at it there can be no argument – if Long COVID victims had access to Coca Tea, many would find relief and maybe even regain their health. And so cheap, easy, and natural. The following post contains dozens of links to hard data that support the possibility of Coca Leaf tea as a natural, safe treatment for Long Haul COVID

So really – what possible harm could there be in allowing people suffering from Long Haul COVID to buy Coca Leaves a pound at a time over the internet so that they can make themselves a few cups of Coca tea a day and maybe get better? Let’s get real. Nobody could put together a Cocaine production operation one pound of leaves at a time. Even with free shipping from Amazon Prime – which is where you can bet one-pound bags of fresh organic Coca leaves would show up immediately. Coca Leaf for tea will be way too expensive to buy by the ton, which is what would be needed for even a small cocaine operation. So there’s really zero issue about legalizing small amounts for making this healing medicine.

Two weeks after regulations were lifted on fresh Coca Leaf it would be available from indigenous sellers on the internet and Long COVID sufferers worldwide could begin treating themselves and we could all find out if those doctors in the 1800s were just primitive fools without access to modern medical knowledge – or maybe we’re the fools? If you’re curious to find out, here’s your access to virtually the entire body of long-lost Coca Leaf medical knowledge and a whole lot more.

5 long-lost books, over 800+ Digital pages, with hyperlinks to 300 years of amazing history!

On May 4, 2021 I sent the following letter to Janet Woodcock, Director of FDA (Janet.Woodcock@fda.hhs.gov) along with copies to top officials of FDA and editors at the Washington Post and NY Times. The FDA is sitting on top of the tobacco product pesticide atrocity, and is enabling the Tobacco Cartel’s suppression of all research on pesticide contamination of tobacco products and the relationship of that concealed chemical horror to 500,000 smoking deaths a year in the US – 7 Million people a year worldwide.

I’m sure the agency’s involvement in covering up this atrocity is so deep that the present stewards of this Federal behemoth are unlikely to be able to step back and admit that they have been terribly wrong, and that organic tobacco products could in fact save many, many lives. Organic tobacco products will not stop people from smoking but they will not harm most moderate smokers – it really is that simple. If FDA disputes that, first check the hard data and then let the very simple, very inexpensive studies begin. How likely is that? Nevertheless I believe that with enough light, the truth will not only emerge but will prevail.

Hello Director Woodcock – I would like to offer data from an FDA-funded NCSU study on the relative toxicity of Little Cigars vs Cigarettes to illustrate why much or perhaps all the research on smoking and health since the 1970s is very likely severely compromised and is probably useless as science. If what I am about to show you is as the hard data says it is, then none of the extensive and very expensive smoking and health research that used Kentucky Reference Cigarettes can be used to determine the actual threat to health posed by smoking tobacco. As you know, that means virtually 100% of all research on smoking and health.

Here is a representative dataset from this FDA-funded study that goes to the heart of the unrecognized but critically important problem of severely compromised data in almost every piece of smoking & health research since the 1970s. For such a simple little graphic the depths of the conspiracy and crime it reveals is truly remarkable. If that strikes you as exaggeration please read on.

(from) “Little Cigars are More Toxic than Cigarettes and Uniquely Change the Airway Gene and Protein Expression” https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28447619/

The objective of the research, as you know, was to determine whether flavored Little Cigars are more toxic than non-flavored Little Cigars, and it is part of the years-long, multi-hundred million dollar campaign by FDA to regulate tobacco product flavoring. 

Like all the other data in this extensive study, which you can review yourselves by clicking the link, this dataset shows that Little Cigars tested far more toxic than cigarettes to human lung tissue. Than ALL the cigarettes – and that’s what is critically important.

That small fact is the key to why all research using Kentucky Reference cigarettes has been compromised – the fact that as your own data reveal, Kentucky Reference Cigarettes are almost equally as toxic as Marlboros and Camels. Not only this dataset but every one in the study show the same thing – Kentucky Reference Cigarettes are about as toxic as Marlboros and Camels. 

This remarkable fact is not noted by the researchers, who are laser-focused on discovering whether flavored little cigars are more toxic than unflavored little cigars. After extensive lab work and analysis, their research finds that both flavored and unflavored Little Cigars are equally toxic to human lung tissue. That makes them satisfied enough to recommend that all Little Cigars should be banned, not just the flavored ones. The researchers express puzzlement at why the flavored Swisher Sweets aren’t more toxic than the Unflavored, but they dismiss the finding in favor of the conclusion that regardless, Little Cigars are far more toxic than cigarettes. All cigarettes. Including the Kentucky Reference Cigarettes.

That is why I call this NCSU study clear evidence, yet to be proven by testing of Kentucky Reference Cigarettes, that the past 50 years of smoking and health research using them as the baseline have been so compromised as to be useless.

This data is from lab tests I commissioned as part of an independent research/writing project. The lab is fully qualified and credentialed to perform the tests. To my knowledge neither FDA nor any other public health agency has ever published such research. However, it is easily replicated and verified.

Wouldn’t you say that if Kentucky Reference cigarettes are as toxic as Marlboros and Camels then this data at least suggests that there may be some unrecognized confounding variables affecting research findings using Kentucky Reference Cigarettes? Wouldn’t that merit a quick test or two on some of the Kentucky Reference Cigarettes that are surely available in any of the 14 FDA ‘Tobacco Research’ labs?

Wouldn’t you say that the DDT, Carbendazim and Cypermethrin in the Swisher Sweets, among the 13 unique fungicides and insecticides in this brand (shown in red), might explain the differences in toxicity between this product and the Marlboro and Camel cigarettes, both in this data and in your FDA-funded research? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28447619/

And the Kentucky Reference Cigarettes as well, wouldn’t you say?

As you know Director Woodcock, Kentucky Reference Cigarettes have been the baseline standard for tobacco product research since the 1970s. They are the source of “tobacco” smoke and extract for most if not all of thousands of smoking and health studies. 

Because they are the scientific reference standards for tobacco smoke, one would assume that when used as intended they would actually yield tobacco smoke or extract data, free of important confounding variables, and especially confounding variables that are known to the manufacturers of these reference cigarettes but never revealed to the research scientists using them as baseline standard references for tobacco smoke. However as you can see, at least some of the toxicity of Marlboros and Camels is clearly due to pesticide residues, and the difference in human lung cell toxicity between the three Marlboro, Camel and Kentucky Reference and the Swisher Sweets can rather dramatically be seen in the pesticides that are unique to Swisher Sweets. 

Director Woodcock – what do you think would be the results of the NCSU study, or any of the thousands of other such compromised studies, if USDA Organic Tobacco cigarettes had been used as the baseline reference instead of Kentucky Reference cigarettes? Please look again at the dataset. 

If Kentucky Reference Cigarettes are in fact contaminated with an unknown burden of pesticide residues, and if that burden makes them comparable in toxicity to other commercial cigarette brands, that how is it that they can be used as a baseline standard for tobacco smoke in research? What about the role of these unrecognized confounding variables in all the ‘smoking & health’ data that has used these ‘reference standards’ since the 1970s?

And Director Woodcock, may I point out that in my data, USDA organic tobacco cigarettes were used as the reference standard and as you can see in the data, is is pretty clear that the organic tobacco cigarettes are far less toxic than even the ‘natural’ tobacco cigarette, which is itself less toxic than the Marlboros, Camels and Swisher Sweets. 

This is an easily-settled issue. Let’s test Kentucky Reference Cigarettes – current and archived samples, and get a clear picture of the hidden confounding variables that, if present, have been compromising smoking and health research for decades.

FDA has 14 full-scale tobacco research centers and spends hundreds of millions of dollars pursuing research on the dangers of mint and other flavors in tobacco products. With a budget of $500 I, or anyone else with access to a qualified pesticide testing lab, could prove or disprove the presence of pesticide residues in Kentucky Reference Cigarettes, and with a budget of $50,000 I could test the top 100 brands of cigarettes and little cigars for this hidden source of dangerous toxicity to smokers. In the hundreds of millions that FDA has funded in “tobacco” research, no such study has ever been funded by FDA. 

Director Woodcock, I know that in the past, for various reasons, FDA has tried to suppress public awareness of the differences between organic, pesticide-free tobacco and pesticide-contaminated tobacco. However, in the face of the evidence I am presenting in this message I hope that FDA will overcome whatever political pressures have caused FDA to abandon its duty to protect the public and will cause FDA to take a more responsible approach to determining the relative hazards and safety of organic vs contaminated tobacco products.

To close this message I am enclosing links to a number of blog posts where I cite peer-reviewed science and hard data in support of the idea that the pesticides in tobacco products represent an unrecognized, non-trivial threat to the health of smokers which is almost completely preventable. Legislation that recognized the role of pesticide exposure in smoking disease and death, and acted to limit or eliminate that exposure, would do more for public health than eliminating mint and fruit flavors, which has been the FDA’s rather absurd passion and focus for decades.

Director Woodcock – open the shades and let in the light.

Sincerely, Bill Drake

This post offers hard evidence and historic documentation of the role of Federal agencies in concealing the health threat to smokers created by unregulated pesticide exposurehttps://panaceachronicles.com/2021/03/01/the-fda-tobacco-cartel-confidence-game/
This post documents why the US Surgeon General’s cigarette pack “warnings’ never mention tobaccohttps://panaceachronicles.com/2021/02/07/surgeon-general-fda-cigarette-warnings-fine-cut-gems-of-deceit-obfuscation/
This post offers a look at the historical origins of today’s breast cancer, diabetes and obesity epidemics in the trans-generational impact of DDT and Organochlorine pesticide contaminants in cigarettes 1950-1972, and the current state of DDT in tobacco products in 2021https://panaceachronicles.com/2021/04/07/born-1950-1972-struggling-with-obesity-diabetes-or-breast-cancer-did-your-mother-smoke/
This post links new hard data on pesticide contaminants in cigarettes with the elevated health risks this creates for Diabetic smokers, and the simple strategy that individual smokers can use to eliminate the threat. https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/11/17/diabetes-smoking-hidden-connection-possible-treatment/
A radical “quit smoking” plan that will probably offend a lot of non-smokers but that could help a lot of Diabetic smokers quit hurting themselves without having to quit.https://panaceachronicles.com/2021/03/06/quit-without-quitting-how-why-diabetic-smokers-can-heal-themselves/
7 Million Smokers Dead Every Year; 50 Million Sickened and Crippled – how much of this is preventable?https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/11/11/if-this-isnt-genocide-then-what-is/
This post links hard data on DDT in Swisher Sweets brand of little cigars, smoked by millions of young women, with peer-reviewed published research on pre-natal genetic damage to the babyhttps://panaceachronicles.com/2020/11/23/swisher-sweets-attack-baby-human-sonic-hedgehogs/
This post links hard data on hidden fungicides in tobacco brands popular in marginalized communities with peer-reviewed published research that demonstrates that exposure to these same fungicides is strongly associated with testicular cancerhttps://panaceachronicles.com/2021/01/31/are-8-million-young-black-brown-native-men-at-high-risk-of-developing-testicular-cancer-from-concealed-ddt-in-their-swisher-sweets/
Any exposure to several of the pesticides shown to contaminate tobacco products are proven to have greater impact on babies with Latinx, African American, American Indian and Pacific Island genetics.https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/11/09/swisher-sweets-cause-irreversible-neurological-damage-to-black-brown-babies/
Could the unexplained link between smoking and suicide be explained by the known link between pesticide exposure and suicide, once you become aware of the concealed pesticide contamination in cigarettes?https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/10/18/alcoholism-addiction-suicide-smoking-insecticides-and-fungicides/
There’s nothing spontaneous if a young smoker loses her baby because the insecticides and fungicides in her cigarettes have interrupted fetal development creating ‘non-viable offspring’ doing to her what they are designed to do to bugs.https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/12/14/500000-spontaneous-abortions-preventable-genocide/
When a pregnant woman is exposed to DDT during a critical time window in her female baby’s development that female baby will have 4X greater risk of developing breast cancer if she is Black or Brown-skinned.https://panaceachronicles.com/2020/12/07/little-cigars-black-brown-babies-extreme-breast-cancer-risk/

The Tobacco Cartel must be amazed at how easily they’ve been able to slide vaping and e-cigarettes past virtually the entire anti-smoking anti-Tobacco coalition. Of course they get no credit for innovation – the vaping thing happened almost totally without the Cartel’s involvement, coming straight out of the Cannabis space, but they knew a great thing immediately and got onto co-opting it early and hard. The Tobacco Cartel loves the idea of selling flavored industrial nicotine to vapers and e-cig puffers instead of having to go to all the trouble of making combustable tobacco products.

In spite of the Tobacco Cartel singing the praises of vaping and e-cigs, which really ought to raise a few suspicions, evidently almost everyone who hates tobacco and smoking professionally (always conflating the two) agrees that having kids inhale nicotine by vaping it or using e-cigs is safer & better than having them smoke what everyone believes are tobacco cigarettes. CDC, FDA, Truth Initiative, TobaccoFreeKids, all the players agree, with suitable reluctance for public consumption, that its better to have kids vaping pure nicotine than smoking cigarettes.

So – let’s fact-check this – if inhaling nicotine is sort of OK, but smoking tobacco cigarettes is definitely not OK, then it must be the tobacco that is definitely not OK – right? I mean, smoking cigarettes means smoking the tobacco plus inhaling the nicotine on the tobacco leaves, right? Cigarettes are made of tobacco, and of course all those nasty additives. But now we know, because the government tells us so, that inhaling nicotine by itself is safer than smoking tobacco cigarettes. That’s because we all know, as the government tells us, that smoking tobacco is harmful, dangerous, and deadly – right? That’s what the government has been telling us since about 1965 – right? And that’s what all the research since the 1960s says, right?

Well actually no on the research and no on what the government is telling us

The truth is that we know zip about the health consequences of smoking tobacco. That’s because none of the decades-long research on smoking and health has actually investigated the health consequences of combusting tobacco and inhaling tobacco smoke. All the “Kentucky Reference” research cigarettes supplied to researchers worldwide since the 1970s BY THE TOBACCO CARTEL ITSELF have been contaminated with bioactive chemical contaminants, including globally banned fungicides and insecticides, concealed from the researchers and skewing the “tobacco smoke” and “cigarette smoke” data in unknown but undoubtedly significant ways. Concealed confounding variables.

Every research scientist and doctor in the world doing smoking and health research has been deliberately led to believe, or simply permitted to conclude (if they ever doubted) that they were studying the smoking and health consequences of smoking tobacco. Every single scientist involved in smoking and health research worldwide has assumed that the ‘standardized’ cigarettes that the Tobacco Cartel supplied to them for their scientific studies were going to give them the results of smoking and being exposed to tobacco smoke – that Kentucky Reference cigarette smoke and tobacco smoke are the same thing. Except they aren’t – not at all.

These “scientific’ research cigs, which in the early 1970s the Cartel began supplying to researchers through the front of a respected tobacco country university, have always been presented to researchers, and accepted without question by them, as standardized tobacco cigarettes, and much is made that these research cigs are specially manufactured with none of those suspicious ‘additives’ or other flavoring chemicals to mess up the results. Yes sir, these cigs are suitable for every kind of smoking research – courtesy of the Tobacco Cartel, in the interests of pure science. 

But there’s a huge hidden problem. Major confounding variables in the form of highly bioactive insecticide and fungicide chemicals have been present in these University of Kentucky “Research Cigarettes” since the beginning, and have never once been documented, revealed, or accounted for. These “Kentucky Reference Cigarettes” that have been used in every research study since the 1970s are and always have been contaminated with bioactive pesticide residues with known health consequences of exposure by any route, let alone by inhalation whole and dry distilled, but they have never once been mentioned or accounted for in any research findings. 

You can browse a few examples of the surviving tobacco/cigarette pesticide research that virtually ended in the 1970s here  and  here  and here  and here and here.

None of the tens of thousands of researchers since the 1970s have known that these confounding variables were present in the reference cigarettes they were using and were skewing every set of data on cigarettes, cigarette smoke, and so-called “Tobacco smoke extract” (TSE) which is actually Kentucky Reference Cigarette smoke extract – not the same thing at all. Before about 1970 there was plenty of research on actual cigarettes that people were smoking – you can browse a few examples of the surviving tobacco/cigarette pesticide research that virtually ended in the 1970s here  and  here  and here  and here and here.

Just in case you think maybe we shouldn’t get excited about tiny doses of pesticide residues in cigarettes, check this research that says today’s pesticides don’t depend on brute force firepower like the good old days; instead they use molecular stealth to get the job done.

“Toxic effects of pesticide mixtures at a molecular level: their relevance to human health”

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22728724/

And “No” on the government.

Now for another perspective on how this decades-long concealment works, please check the US Surgeon General’s “Warnings”. One of these four warnings are mandated by federal regulations to be on every pack of cigarettes.

Warning 1: Smoking Causes Lung Cancer, Heart Disease, Emphysema, and May Complicate Pregnancy

Warning 2: Quitting Smoking Now Greatly Reduces Serious Risks to Your Health.

Warning 3: Smoking by Pregnant Women May Result in Fetal Injury, Premature Birth, and Low Birth Weight.

Warning 4: Cigarette Smoke Contains Carbon Monoxide.

See “Tobacco” mentioned anywhere here? 

Think that’s accidental? An oversight maybe?

If so, then you must not be familiar with how many high-priced pairs of eyeballs look at language like this before it goes public. So why would the US government and the Tobacco Cartel want to avoid saying that “Tobacco” did all this harm and instead deliberately use “smoking” and ‘cigarette’?

If the Feds and the Anti-Smoking and anti-Tobacco forces all agree with the Tobacco Cartel that smoking cigarettes is worse than the inhaling straight nicotine, and if the Surgeon General is avoiding the mention of Tobacco in every single “warning”, so isn’t the Surgeon General telling us, by logical inference, that smoking pure, organic Tobacco cigarettes without pesticide contaminants would be better than either/both (1) inhaling pesticides in contaminated cigarettes or (2) vaping industrial nicotine.

Of course, the FDA has tried to head off any discussion of this by forcing the manufacturers of organic tobacco cigarettes to place an additional warning on the pack saying that organic cigarettes are not a safer smoke. Good thing nobody is forcing FDA to say “not safer than what?” because the answer would have to be “smoking tobacco without inhaling any pesticides is not any safer than smoking tobacco and inhaling pesticides known to be hazardous to human health, which we’ve been allowing smokers to do full-on for over 50 years and not said one word about it. All while being well-paid with secure pensions and guaranteed consulting jobs after we retire as Federal regulators.”

It’s pretty simple to see full evidence of a federal government/tobacco cartel conspiracy to conceal material facts about the dangers of smoking contaminated cigarettes by carefully-done omission, and the use of very deliberately crafted very misleading statements. All the evidence you’ll ever need is right there on any pack of Marlboros or any other brand – concealing any inference or trace of the 100% avoidable dangers inside.

When you see ‘Trace” in this list, please keep in mind that this simply means the chemical is present at the limits of detection and has nothing to do with the potential for danger that this level of exposure represents. Please also keep in mind that we can be certain that there are numerous similarly dangerous fungicides and insecticides lurking below the limits of detection but still full of bioactive threat potential.

So, here’s a fun way to do a little medical forensics yourself. Remember – this has never been done and published in any research journal, so you’ll be a pioneer, but it’s so simple. Anyone can play this really fun little forensic detective game. Simply pick one of the insecticides or fungicides in any of these brands and Google that pesticide’s name plus things like “breast cancer”, “birth defect”, “autism”, “obesity”, “neuropathy”, “sperm”, and “pregnancy’”. You won’t hit every time but I guarantee you’ll hit often enough to make the point.

Then if you really like playing the game, you can get a complete list of the pesticides I found in 5 brands of tobacco products in my book “Smoke No Evil”, along with a rather detailed look at the research that pops up when you begin looking. 

It’s amazing to find the hidden surprises in those Marlboros, or Camels, or Swisher Sweets little cigars, or American Spirit “natural” Blues. Check what comes up, for example, when you Google “DDT” and “genetic” or “fetal”. Swisher Sweets are loaded with DDT and millions of young women smoke them.

But back to Marlboros for today. see that bifenthrin near the top of the list? That 0.870 mg/kg concentration translates to roughly 8 nanograms of pure bifenthrin that will enter the smokestream ahead of the burning cigarette coal, then on into the smoker’s lungs and into the smoker’s bloodstream. That’s with each cigarette. Remember dose or concentration may not matter, especially if that doseage level is being maintained by a pack or so a day.

From the lungs into the blood, and then onward to the testicles, if the smoker is a Marlboro cowboy. (We’ll get to Marlboro Mommies in a minute.)

Why should cowboys care? Check this warning to cattle breeders:

“A commonly used insecticide ingredient may depress semen quality if used on bulls too close to breeding season, research says”

https://www.beefmagazine.com/genetics/common-insecticide-may-affect-bull-fertility

Guess what “commonly used insecticide” needs to be kept away from your prize bulls balls cowboy. Maybe yours too? So be sure to smoke downwind of the herd, if you’re gonna keep smoking Marlboros. Sorry about that, stud. Or, you could switch to organic tobacco cigarettes, but would a real cowboy do that?

But – oh wait! It’s not just bulls and cowboys that might want to avoid the bifenthrin. Looks like it’s the unborn too – at least unborn baby Zebrafish.

“Collectively, bifenthrin induced developmental toxicity, inflammatory cell death and anti-angiogenesis during embryogenesis.

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31734314/

But wait again! That research is only about little fish babies being affected by bifenthrin. So no worries for Marlboro Mommies – right? 

Hmmm – actually since bifenthrin has never been tested for what might happen when its being inhaled by Marlboro Mommies, we can’t say for sure that bifenthrin in your Marlboros will lead to a miscarriage or to birth defects, like with those teeny Zebrafish. We only know about bifenthrin does to bull sperm and unborn baby fish – so far. And by the way, scientists use Zebrafish because what happens to them is a pretty good proxy for what can happen to mammals. Like us.

But unfortunately even if it turns out that Bifenthrin only kills baby fish, Marlboro Mommies aren’t home free yet because then there’s that Metalaxyl. Looks like it gets right in there and targets the pregnant Marlboro smoker’s cord connecting her to the baby in her womb. Wonder what Metalaxyl is doing to all those little rapidly-dividing and developing cells in there? This research isn’t on bull balls or baby fish – this is relevant to what is actually happening right now inside the umbilical cord connecting every Marlboro Mommy to her unborn baby – the metalaxyl is coming, and they’re talking toxicity.

Cytotoxicity and genotoxicity of methomyl, carbaryl, metalaxyl, and pendimethalin in human umbilical vein endothelial cells

11 January 2021

https://doi.org/10.1002/jat.4139

“This is a first study on HUVECs (human umbilical vein endothelial cells) signifying the cytotoxic–genotoxic and apoptotic potential of carbamate insecticides (methomyl and carbaryl), fungicide (metalaxyl), and herbicide (pendimethalin).”

I guess the bottom line in this ledger of horrors is that there’s not a single one of the fungicides and pesticides I found in tobacco products that is without severe potential for human health impact through inhalation, and many of them are already proven dangerous and harmful through other routes of exposure – dermal & ingestion mostly. Have none of them have ever been tested for their impact when inhaled by humans because who could have imagined that the pesticides being used on tobacco crops might have a health impact when that contaminated tobacco was turned into cigarettes? Somehow that possibility was so universally discounted that not a single study on the subject has ever been run.

Also, pesticides themselves are never tested before being approved for use for their effects when inhaled in sub-chronic doses, like for instance by hundreds of millions of smokers worldwide. Not an insignificant level of pesticide exposure, wouldn’t you say? Don’t you find that it is a little strange that not one regulatory authority in the US, or apparently the world, is taking any steps at all to acknowledge or investigate much less deal with this 100% preventable public health threat? An awful lot of money has been spent on ‘research’, and a lot of lives have been lost – and not one single study. Looks like some folks have some explaining to do one day, in the right court of law.

Meanwhile, if you or anyone you love is a smoker, here’s my thought of the day for you and for them: you can quit smoking tobacco products that everybody agrees are terrible for you, and they are terrible for you but not for the reasons you or anyone else thinks, but you can keep smoking tobacco like you enjoy doing, and you’ll actually enjoy it more, simply by switching to organic tobacco cigarettes or if you’re adventurous you can switch to making RYO organic tobacco cigarettes.

USDA Certified Organic tobacco is safer and healthier to smoke than insecticide and fungicide-contaminated tobacco. Duh. How much safer? We don’t know. Whatever tobacco may or may not do to the smoker, we do have a pretty good idea of what inhaling insecticides and fungicides probably does, even though somehow nobody has ever gotten around to comparing the health effects of smoking tobacco with & without pesticide contaminants. The excuse – if you can believe this – is that smoking tobacco is so dangerous that we don’t have to bother looking at the pesticides. Multiple government agencies say this in print, over and over through the past 50 years, yet there has never once been a study comparing the health effects of smoking pesticides with smoking pure tobacco. This is purely a political statement, not a scientific or even a moral one.

We know what many of the fungicides and insecticides do by other routes and we know that dose doesn’t matter for many of them – a few molecules are enough to damage fetal life or kick off breast or testicular cancer processes or damage DNA for future generations.

A simple switch to organic tobacco cigarettes means you will be able to enjoy smoking safely and pleasurably regardless of what the authorities and the Cartel want you to believe. Ask yourself – why would the government go to all that trouble to make the only cigarette brand without pesticides, the only USDA organic tobacco brand, say on its packs that organic tobacco is not a safer smoke? Why would a government agency like CDC publish reams of data on pesticide exposure and then say that pesticide contaminants in cigarettes don’t matter enough to even consider them as a possible source of preventable harm from smoking cigarettes?

If you smoke, just try this. Just switch to smoking organic cigarettes. Either American Spirit ready-rolls or RYO with organic – NOT JUST “NATURAL” – tobacco. You don’t have to stop smoking to be safer, healthier and more natural. Recognize that you’ve been allowing your (and everybody else’s) unquestioning belief in a bunch of smooth lies keep you from just trying it yourself. Switch to organic tobacco – cigarettes or RYO. Stay with it for 30 days and long before those 30 days are up you’ll know. This is one simple choice will change your life and the lives of everyone who loves you. You’ll not only feel better, but you’ll find that you’re in control of your smoking. Many, many organic tobacco smokers say they now smoke way less than a pack a day – many say only 3-4 do it for them. 

And with some great CBD Cannabis Hemp cigarettes coming on the market now a lot of smokers are starting the day with an organic tobacco cigarette, then pacing themselves with a few CBD cigarettes during the day, and then maybe one or two more tobacco cigarettes in the evening. It’s a whole different way to approach doing what every addicted cigarette smokers wants to do – quit! 

But to quit what most smokers really want to quit – the sick feelings and the cravings and the addiction. Most smokers don’t actually want to quit smoking because they like it, and with organic pesticide-free tobacco they don’t have to until and if they want to. I’ve written a short little book “The Three Step Natural Tobacco Path To Freedom From Cigarettes” if you would like to read what others have found when they switched to organic tobacco cigarettes.

I believe that its quite possible that unbiased research, which would be simple and inexpensive to plan and conduct, would find that smoking organic tobacco cigarettes in moderation and with an otherwise healthy lifestyle is perfectly safe in the context of a normal life.

For the immediate present, how much of the worldwide impact on health from smoking contaminated tobacco products, what percentage of the actual harm, can be immediately alleviated by individual smokers switching to an organic tobacco cigarette? 

Nobody has to quit smoking – at least not at first. Simply switching to an organic cigarette that doesn’t contain insecticides and fungicides for 30 days will change any smoker’s life enough that they will understand what was happening to them previously, and will finally be able to make smoking decisions for themselves including tapering down and quitting.

That’s all it takes. If you smoke anything but organic tobacco cigarettes now, and if you’ve ever wanted to quit, try switching for one month and see for yourself what happens to your cravings, your habit, and your addiction. If you think that just switching to a cigarette that doesn’t dose you with a pesticide cocktail every puff isn’t going to change your life then you’re in for a very pleasant surprise. It’s a surprise that immense amounts of Federal and private dollars are being spent to keep you from discovering – that it’s not the Tobacco that’s been your problem all along. There’s nothing wrong with enjoying Tobacco. Tobacco in moderation will not harm you.

By the way, it’s not the additives you need to worry about in those conventional cigarettes either – those are an intentional distraction, a “red herring’ that works incredibly well. How much debate do we need to have about mint being used to attract Black smokers when their Swisher Sweets are dosing them with DDT and Carbendazim – which apparently the FDA doesn’t care about enough to mention?

Still, the whole “additives’ thing seems to have kept the anti-tobacco hounds baying at shadows and off the scent for generations, along with that silly list of ‘7000 chemicals’ they all love to tout – as if the number of chemicals in the smoke of any burning plant matter doesn’t emit thousands of compounds. That is propaganda masquerading as science, just like the entire edifice of government and private anti-smoking, anti-tobacco lies and deception, funded by the Tobacco Cartel, serving the purposes of the Tobacco Cartel, and crafted to such perfection that it can all be done in plain sight with nobody noticing. Amazing.