SATANIC SMOKERSFrom: Jacque
Petterson Dear Forces, Only on 9-11 did I see Satan as much at work as I saw in your Web site. I am one of those people who never smoked and yet whose lungs have been destroyed by tobacco smoke. It killed my first husband at the age of 39 (not 70). I will and am doing everything in my power to educate the public and the world about this deadly product. Get thee behind me Satan. Jacque Petterson From: FORCES Dear Ms. Petterson: Your site is a scream. I thoroughly enjoyed it. You are lying about your first husband and you are lying about yourself. If you can offer proof (look up the word in the dictionary) for either of those absurd assertions, we'd love to see it. Until then, grow up. Cordially, Enoch Ludlow, FORCES From: Jacque
Petterson Dear Forces, Only Satan calls the truth lies. Why would I have a reason to lie? I, and the millions of others seriously affected by tobacco have better things to do than make up stories. If you are smoking, you will know the truth someday without hearing it from me. The suffering will speak for itself. Jacque Petterson From: FORCES Thank you for keeping our record at 100%. When asked to provide proof, anti-tobacco is unable to do so. Name calling is all you are capable of and you're not really any good at that. Have a nice day. Enoch Ludlow, FORCES From: Jacque
Petterson What kind of proof do you expect to get over the Internet? I'm curious!
Jacque From: FORCES Ms. Petterson: Are you able to read and retain what you have read for 30 seconds? I'll paste my original request asking for proof in my first e-mail to you: You are lying about your first husband and you are lying about yourself. If you can offer proof (look up the word in the dictionary) for either of those absurd assertions, we'd love to see it. Cordially, Enoch Ludlow, FORCES From: Jacque
Petterson Mr. Ludlow: I cannot prove anything to you about my first husband death. He chain smoked and died of cancer (the death certificate is in Texas). Nor that my parent's, first husband's, and co-worker's smoking damaged my lungs and I am just short of having COPD (my lung specialist prescribes medicines for COPD to keep me breathing when I encounter smokers). Let me ask you why is it that when I get near someone who has recently smoked the chemicals on their clothes cause an asthma attack? What is your theory? Amazingly I have watched too many loved ones and friends die from the damage done to their bodies by smoking (both young and old), and have noticed a lot of coincidences in the combination of lung and brain cancer, such as George Harrison. I am so terrified that I am going to watch more of my family members, that mean the world to me, unnecesarily suffer and die because they smoke. I do not believe, when it comes to secondhand smoke, that non-smokers should have to prove it is dangerous, but that smokers should first have to prove it is not, before they expose others to it. I answered your question honestly, now it's your turn to answer my questions:
Jacque Petterson From: FORCES Ms. Petterson: Thank you for finally providing some assertions about which we can discuss. I cannot prove anything to you about my first husband death. He chain smoked and died of cancer (the death certificate is in Texas). Nor that my parent's, first husband's, and co-worker's smoking damaged my lungs and I am just short of having COPD (my lung specialist prescribes medicines for COPD to keep me breathing when I encounter smokers). You have run headlong into the major problem facing anti-tobacco operatives. Although they, unlike you, have enormous resources at their fingertips, they also cannot, and do not attempt, to provide proof for their contention that smoking alone is responsible for premature death. All the diseases attributed to tobacco are multifactorial, often with hundreds – if not thousands -- of concomitant causes which interact differently in every single human in concert with hundreds of ever-changing variables. Another complication is that all the diseases attributed to tobacco also occur in non smokers. It is therefore clear that it is impossible to confidently isolate single co-factors such as primary or passive tobacco smoke exposure; thus, it is impossible to quantify the contribution (if any at all) of tobacco in a death or disease. We would welcome correspondence from your doctor verifying that you do have borderline Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and proof that you have this condition due to secondhand tobacco smoke exposure. Let me ask you why is it that when I get near someone who has recently smoked the chemicals on their clothes cause an asthma attack? What is your theory? My theory is that your asthma attack is psychosomatic in nature. The aroma, if any, on their clothes as well as the knowledge that they have recently smoked a cigarette is the trigger. You would not have an attack if the smoker doused his clothes with cologne after smoking the cigarette. You would have an attack if you thought the individual had been smoking even if he had not. Even the anti-tobacco enterprise does not contend that an asthma attack is caused by the residue of tobacco smoke. Please check out our section on Smoking and Asthma. Please note the first item, headlined "Asthma is not caused by smoking." About one aspect of asthma there is no controversy. As smoking rates have declined in Canada and the United States, the asthma rate, for both adults and children, has accelerated. If asthma were linked to smoking the occurrence of asthma should be declining rather than rising. Amazingly I have watched too many loved ones and friends die from the damage done to their bodies by smoking (both young and old), and have noticed a lot of coincidences in the combination of lung and brain cancer, such as George Harrison. Coincidences do not make for good scientific pronouncements. You are free to tally up your personal death toll from smoking and provide the proof that smoking is what did these people in. I remind you that these people didn't just smoke. They ate as well, for instance. You do not quantify the incidence of diet, or other factors, in those "coincidences". There is no evidence that they would not have contracted cancer if only they hadn't smoked. I am so terrified that I am going to watch more of my family members, that mean the world to me, unnecesarily suffer and die because they smoke. You believe that smoking invariably leads to death and, conversely, that if one doesn't smoke one will never get sick and die. You are a victim of anti-tobacco's effort to induce irrational hysteria and you have my deepest sympathy. Very few people, even those who detest smoking, describe themselves as "terrified" over a pleasure enjoyed by millions. Anti-tobacco must be held accountable for strewing hysteria throughout the emotionally vulnerable. I do not believe, when it comes to secondhand smoke, that non-smokers should have to prove it is dangerous, but that smokers should first have to prove it is not, before they expose others to it. The real world doesn't work that way. Those who accuse must prove. The Environmental Protection Agency attempted to prove that secondhand smoke is dangerous. The World Health Organization attempted to prove secondhand smoke is dangerous. Both agencies failed, despite spending millions on their attempt. That anti-tobacco attempts to invert established scientific processes to accommodate it's inability to prove secondhand smoke is harmful speaks volumes about its logical and moral bankruptcy. I answered your question honestly, now it's your turn to answer my questions:
I would not blow smoke in the face of anyone. See my response regarding asthma above. Since the vast majority of smokers do not contract lung cancer, emphysema or COPD, I believe that there is very little difference between the lungs of an average non-smoker and an average smoker. As mentioned above, there are thousands of factors that make up the physical condition of each human being. Smoking is only one of them. Right now it is the only factor that provides employment for thousands and millions of dollars for special interests groups. Should the tobacco industry be magically eliminated, the war on tobacco would be eliminated as well. It's not the smokers directly who are worth shaking down, it is the rich, politically incorrect cigarette manufacturers the is the goose laying those golden eggs. The American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, and the American Lung Association don't have many "findings". Their purpose is not to perform research into smoking and its effects. Their job is to gather as much money into their organizations as is possible. To this end they are very willing to trumpet conclusions that cannot be proven. They, like you, have been unable to offer proof that even one person has been damaged by smoking, let alone secondhand smoke. Their modus operandi can be seen by a fairly recent incident in Florida where the American Cancer Society was caught in a lie and was brought to task after much work and effort. In conclusion, I would like to apologize for my curt responses to your initial comments. I have been working on bringing some rationality and fairness to the tobacco issue for six years. I have a full-time job and spend most of my free time on this endeavor. Although I consider myself a decent man; law abiding, loving to my family and a good friend, I find myself a target for special interests that pick my pocket and whip up discrimination against me. Being called Satan, however, was a first and I hope that, although you and I will most likely never agree on smoking, we have profited from this correspondence. Cordially, Enoch Ludlow, FORCES From: Jacque
Petterson Mr. Ludlow: You state: My theory is that your asthma attack is psychosomatic in nature. The aroma, if any, on their clothes as well as the knowledge that they have recently smoked a cigarette is the trigger. You would not have an attack if the smoker doused his clothes with cologne after smoking the cigarette. You would have an attack if you thought the individual had been smoking even if he had not. Even the anti-tobacco enterprise does not contend that an asthma attack is caused by the residue of tobacco smoke. Oddly smokers are the only ones telling me my suffering is all in my head. I have never tried to look for an excuse to be sick so I could stop someone from doing something. That doesn't even make sense. When I am around other asthmatics, regardless of what you believe, they all will tell me that tobacco smoke sets off an asthma attack. Some more serious than others. I worked at a company two years ago with a number of smokers. These smokers only smoked outside. From the time I arrived at work until I left I coughed and choked, and people constantly asked me if I knew what the problem was. I could not answer them until this year when I realized the ONLY TIME I cough and choke is when I am in the "same room" with some who has recently smoked. It is not always the smoke that causes the asthma, but once one has it, most, not all, have some sort of reaction to the chemicals. This problem did not become severe enough to really notice until 1995. Before that time I would have preferred, but not made a big deal out of being around it. I was not an anti-smoking person until I could no longer breathe around it. I had no agenda or reason to get sick to stop people from smoking. For me common sense must prevail in the overall issue of smoking and it's dangers, known or unknown. Just like we sometimes can't tell how we get a wart, it's still there. I may not be able to throw around statistics, but I know tobacco is deadly, and I believe 90% of the educated world agrees with me. Many of our sciences are based on observation. I, too, do this in my spare time for free, and I would not be fighting so hard for smoke-free air if the smoke was not hurting myself and everyone else. The thousands of us who know first hand the suffering we go through because smokers will not give us the space we need to breathe without their smoke certainly would have better things to do otherwise. I'm sure neither of us will change the other's mind, and we will both continue to fight for our cause. God bless you and your family during the holidays. Sincerely, Jacque Petterson From: FORCES Ms. Petterson: We are at the end of the road for this conversation. Our entire correspondence will be posed in our FORUM section. My only alteration to your e-mailed messages is to excise the link to your web side. Your site promotes housing discrimination and as such is inappropriate for inclusion. You have been unable to back up any of your contentions with proof. You are not alone in that regard. The American Lung Association, the American Cancer Society, the American Heart Association, the Campaign for Tobacco-free Kids, the Centers for Disease Control, the American Legacy Foundation, the University of California, the Environmental Protection Agency, Action on Smoking or Health, the Americans for Nonsmokers' Rights, the National Institute of Health and the World Health Organization have all been unable to do so, despite billions of dollars and armies of researchers. Perhaps 90% of the German people believed that the Jews were the font of all that country's problems and, knowingly or not, acquiesced to the horrors unleashed to deal with that baseless perception. Faith without proof can lead to devastating results. I will note that 1995 was the year that smoking was banned from so-called public places, including restaurants, in California, the state in which you reside. With that goal achieved anti-tobacco began to mobilize support for banning smoking at home. That mobilization depends on drumming up hysteria over people smoking in their own homes, a problem that didn't exist prior to the smoking ban. You are involved with an outfit that promotes housing discrimination and your credibility as a spokesperson is enhanced because you believe you are a victim of insidious tobacco smoke. You have an open invitation to provide proof that backs up your many allegations. We would be especially interested in any documentation your doctor can provide. I hope during the Christmas season, traditionally a time of peace and good-will, that you reflect upon your role in making life tougher for people who bear you no ill will. Cordially, Enoch Ludlow, FORCES |
Back
to FORCES main page