CORRESPONDENCE WITH HEALTH CANADA ON THE E-CIGARETTE BAN

PLEASE READ FOLLOW-UP TO OUR 2ND LETTER AT: http://cagecanada.blogspot.com/2009/10/health-canadas-reply-to-our-2nd-letter.html

We received a reply to our letter to Health Canada on the e-cigarette ban. Following are the explanations of Diana Dowthwaite the Director General at the Inspectorate for Health Products and Food Branch, as to why e-cigarettes have been condemned by them as well as our reply to hers.

Dear Ms. Cyr

''Thank you for your correspondence dated May 12, 2009, in which you voice your concerns about the availability of electronic cigarettes in Canada.

Electronic cigarettes contain nicotine, which is a highly addictive and toxic substance. Health products containing nicotine fall within the scope of the Food and Drugs Act. Nicotine products currently on the market, such as nicotine gum, patches, inhalers and lozenges, have obtained market authorization from Health Canada. Like these products, electronic cigarettes require market authorization before they can be imported or sold in Canada. The market authorization process exists so that Health Canada can evaluate the evidence of safety, efficacy and quality provided by persons seeking market authorization for a product.

Although electronic cigarettes are being marketed as a safer alternative to conventional tobacco products and, in many cases, as an aid to smoking cessation, the risks they may pose, their benefits, their efficacy and their quality are unknown. Nicotine is a highly addictive and toxic substance, and the inhalation of propylene glycol, which is the substance that produces the simulated smoke, is a known irritant to the upper respiratory tract. For more information about nicotine and addiction, please visit our Health Canada website (http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hlvs/tobac-tabac ... nd-eng.php ) To date, no electronic smoking products have received market authorization from Health Canada.

Health Canada is committed to protecting the health of Canadians by ensuring that health products meet requirements for safety, efficacy and quality. Yours Truly, Diana DowthwaiteDirector General



Dear Ms. Dowthwaite,

Thank you for replying to our queries and criticisms about the banning of electronic cigarettes in Canada. However, your reply requires further clarification and explanations.

You inform us that products that contain nicotine fall within the scope of the Food and Drugs Act since they are marketed as health products . May we respectfully point out to you that despite the fact that some e-cigarette distributors do in fact market their product as a smoking cessation aid, many others market it as a nicotine delivery substitute without any claims of helping tobacco smokers quit their conventional cigarette habit. That all manufacturers and distributors have been banned from marketing their product because of the actions of a few lacks coherence.

In the Food and Drugs Act Schedule F, Part 1, it is indicated that nicotine inhalers with a maximum of 4 mg per dosage are exempted from the prescription regulation. We in turn consulted the specifications for the popular Ruyan e-cigarette, and found that one 16 mg cartridge, which is the equivalent of 300 puffs or 20 cigarettes, has a 3 mg nicotine yield, which is 1 mg below the level that would categorize the product as a regulated prescription drug. Surely then it must fall under the category of an OTC product much like the presently approved inhalers and other pharmaceutical nicotine products mentioned in schedule F, which do not retain any patent rights. Furthermore, according to the Food and Drugs Act, Schedule A, nicotine addiction is exempted from the advertising regulation.

If Health Canada is truly concerned about the health of Canadian citizens, why don't they stipulate strong recommendations and warnings about the product and guidelines as to what maximum nicotine levels per dose can be marketed in order to have the product conform with the schedule F exemptions instead of enacting a complete ban of a product that has proven to be very popular with the public worldwide? This would be similar to the treatment of energy drinks, which, except for Red Bull, are still pending evaluation from Health Canada, yet continue to be readily available to minors and adults alike.

If there exists some reason for e-cigarettes to be treated according to a different standard than other products, we request that you kindly inform us of these reasons. Otherwise, e-cigarettes should remain available to the public until Health Canada can substantiate its hazard claims since e-cigarettes are neither a health product nor a prescription drug, and are therefore legally unregulated at the outset, with the burden of proving any harmful effects resting upon Health Canada.

Iro Cyr for C.A.G.E., Citizens for Civil Liberties, mychoice.ca

Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger: Materialism Out of Control

Recommended reading for anyone who wants to thoroughly document themselves on the anti-tobacco industry and the havoc it is causing societies worldwide from the perspective of a PHD in psychology graduate of the University of Melbourne, Australia, country which, using the author’s own words, ‘’ (Australia) is like a ‘dead zone’. Citizens tend to believe exactly what ‘authorities’ tell them.’’

An important excerpt from the author’s website:

A Note to Nonsmokers

(…) You should be concerned for at least two main reasons. Firstly, you should be concerned that 'health' authorities of the time are not concerned with the dissemination of accurate information or with your actual health, but with enforcing their agenda, even if it means coercing large segments of the population into mental, relational, and moral dysfunction. Secondly, it should be of great concern to you as to how easily you have been brainwashed. Further, if you accept without question whatever you are told by 'authorities', then what else can you be brainwashed into under a tirade of propaganda? There are nonsmokers that have not bought into the bigotry, aware of the manipilation involved. They can obviously see something that you cannot. It is worth your while to see this 'something' before you allow yourself to be coerced into further dysfunction.

Please visit the website and order the book by clicking on the following link: Rampant Antismoking Signifies Grave Danger: Materialism Out of Control

VELVET GLOVE IRON FIST - THE BOOK / THE GOERLITZ TAPES

Christopher Snowdon is a historian, an independent researcher and a writer who has put tremendous amount of time and effort in his relentless search for the truth on tobacco and more particularly on the tobacco control movement.

In addition to his website , Velvet Glove, Iron Fist, that contains rich factual information on the issue, Mr. Snowdon has written a book on the history of anti-smoking that, pending its official publishing date of June 22nd, can be pre-ordered by clicking here .

As well, Mr. Snowdon has now imbedded in his website a series of taped interviews with David Goerlitz, who, after having been employed by the tobacco industry to represent ‘’The Winston Man’’ and having bitterly regretted representing Big Tobacco, now regrets to an even greater extent his association with what he calls the ‘’power hungry, egotistical, money grubbing, holier than thou hypocrites’’ in tobacco control. (See his comments in Dr. Siegel’s June 17/09 posting ‘’FDA Tobacco Bill Itself Admits that It is a Scam’’).

Enjoy, but especially don't neglect to use all this information to educate others who may still be unaware of the extensive corruption in the tobacco control movement.

RELÂCHE ESTIVALE / SUMMER BREAK

À moins de nouvelles extraordinaires, ce blogue fera relâche à partir d’aujourd’hui pour le congé estival. Au plaisir de vous accueillir lors de notre retour à l’automne. Pour échanger avec les membres de C.A.G.E. rendez-vous à notre forum. Bonnes vacances estivales.




Unless there are extraordinary news to report, this blog will interrupt publications for the summer break. To exchange opinions and ideas and to keep up to date with some of the news, please visit our forum. Have yourselves a wonderful summer, see you back in the fall.

TRUTH IS FINALLY SURFACING IN NONE LESS THAN THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

After years of trying to get some mainstream media reporters to investigate the issue, it is heartening to see that someone is finally digging deeper into the Pharmaceutical interests of smoking bans.

Kudos to the authors Jane Zhang and Brody Mills for an honest article on pharma's direct and through the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation funding towards implementing smoking bans to boost their profits. Kudos to the Wall Street Journal for publishing the article. We certainly hope this will motivate more reporters to dig deeper as there is a lot more to bring to light!

Please take the time to drop a note to Jane Zhang and Brody Mills to thank them for their honest work at: Jane.Zhang@wsj.com and brody.mullins@wsj.com .

Excerpts from the article: Nomination Tests Antilobbyist Policy . Please take the time to read the whole article because it is an excellent read.

The Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids has received millions of dollars from pharmaceutical companies that would benefit from the organization's work to reduce smoking because they sell products that help people quit, such as Nicorette gum and NicoDerm patches.

(…)In the past five years, the drug industry has contributed $3.3 million, amounting to 3.2% of the Campaign's funding, said spokesman Vince Willmore.

Most of the money was donated by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, which has contributed nearly $3 million since 2004, according to Campaign records.

Pfizer Inc. donated $385,000 since 2007 and Johnson & Johnson gave $50,000 for an award in 2008 and 2009.

The Campaign was founded in 1996 to take on the tobacco industry. Its first grant came from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, the nonprofit established with the personal fortune of Robert Wood Johnson, who helped build Johnson & Johnson. The foundation, a large shareholder of J&J stock, is the Campaign's biggest contributor, donating more than $85 million since its founding.

What is brought to light in this article is only the tip of the iceberg. There are billions of dollars being funneled through foundations and non-profits into the smoking bans and into the increase of tobacco taxation worldwide to profit the bottom line of the pharma industry. You can find extensive research on the issue at: http://www.rwjf.org/portfolios/grantlist.jsp?iaid=143&gsa=1 and many other links on the same blog http://cleanairquality.blogspot.com/

DREW EDWARDS AND ''THE RECORD'' DISRESPECT AND ABUSE A QUARTER OF THE POPULATION

A couple of our readers brought to our attention a distasteful and hateful article that recently appeared in a Waterloo / Guelph newspaper -- the Waterloo Region Record -- written by a local journalist and family man, Drew Edwards.

We will not dignify the author and the newspaper that printed this hateful piece by linking it here. In summary in his article, I'm going to turn my back on all those stinky smokers, the author expresses that he has decided to let go of unbearable flatulence any time he passes a group of smokers huddled outside smoking, in an effort to get back at them for polluting the air he breathes. He furthermore thinks that smokers should be sent to the zoo with the monkeys and targets on their backs on a spicy food night.

If smokers were a protected identifiable group the editors of this newspaper would have never published such trash. Not only would it have been qualified as hate literature against an identifiable minority but it would have also been considered an incitement to violence towards an important segment of the population.

Obviously The Record believes that at least a quarter of the population is not worthy of respect from their newspaper and those that write for them and as long as it is a less politically correct group of people that is targeted all is well in the wonderful world of journalism. This same newspaper allows to be published ads that discriminate smokers against employment.

Does this newspaper deserve its readership? We dare hope that anyone with any respect for their fellow citizens and themselves stops reading and advertizing in this paper and takes the time to let the editors know exactly why.

ABOUT GUN CONTROL

We asked a newly registered C.A.G.E. member who is a member of the Canadian Shooting Sports association and currently active in lobbying for our ancient right to keep arms in our defense, to explain to us why he disagrees with gun control and particularly with the views of the police forces.

His reply is the side of the story you will not read too often, if at all, in the mainstream media since gun control is an emotionally loaded issue and the media do not want to ruffle any feathers. You will however read it right here complete and unedited:

‘’It is a question of credibility. The Canadian Association of Police Chiefs is a lobby group in the guise of a professional association like the society of automotive engineers. With the resignation of CAPC's ethics adviser over their sponsorship practises it then begs the question just how honest are they? Since one of the generous sponsors of their annual meeting was the CGI group the company responsible for selling the computers and software to the CFC would suggest that their considered opinion of the Registry was bought and paid for by their benefactors the CGI group. Two things suggest that this is the case, First is the statement on record by Chief Julian Fantino when he was still the Chief of the Toronto Police Service "The registry has neither prevented not solved a single crime". Then his ringing endorsement of the use of Tasers. I should mention that TASER International was also a major contributor to the annual conference. Now as a member of CAPC he is part of the endorsement of the registry. Why the about face? Indeed they have used their position in society to the benefit of their corporate sponsors.

The Police Association is a Union, again it is not a professional development association in the classical sense of the word either. They would not be the first Union to cross the line into the political arena. I suspect and I say suspect only because proof remains to be seen, that there is some political bone waiting for them in the wings. What they seem to forget is that they are "Our employees" the fact that they are armed is a privilege granted to them by the public. In mother England the police are not armed and have not been armed for 178 years. They make the claim that the registry is used 9400 times per day, well as it turns out the way in which the system is set up that every time a police officer makes a routine traffic stop and the drivers licence is ran through the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC) it also registers a hit on the registry.

The CFRO computers get "hit" 9,413 time a day on average.

Where this figure falls apart is in the breakdown of these "hits" as follows:

Individual Name: 6440
Address: 2574
Serial#: 202
Licence#: 141
Certificate#: 19 <-- This is the ONLY one that relates to an acutual FIREARMS INQUIRYTelephone# :15
Certificate# = Firearm

This is from the Canadian Firearms Centres own figures. So there is at the least a deliberate misrepresentation of numbers, at worse just a bald face lie.

Which brings me to the next claim that they use the registry to know if a firearm is present at the scene of a call. This is only true if the firearms are registered. Since the gangbangers and other n'rr do wells do not register their firearms how is the registry so indispensable? It would only work where the firearms are registered. Secondly since the bill does not do away with the licencing requirement it is still possible to ascertain that a firearm might be present. This renders the argument moot. I have also read that the concern of the Police Association is the safety of their members. But that is the reason that we allow them to openly carry a firearm and access to other arms as well. Are they suggesting that if they get a negative on a firearm they proceed without caution?

Finally on this point I have to ask what did they do before the registry? Indeed we only need look south of the border where there is not a universal registry and in some states not even the requirement to get a licence, life goes on their. Contrary to what is seen in the news and Hollywood the streets are not running with blood.

The weapon of Choice? This is another little phrase that gets trotted out but when you look at the numbers, in fact guns barely make it over a quarter of the homicides. In all of Canada there were 594 homicides, this includes all methods. 188 shootings, 190 stabbings 116 beatings, 50 strangulations, 4 burnings/suffocations, 19 other methods, 27 not known, in 2007. 188 people shot sounds like a great deal but when you compare the total of the other categories 406 in total 188 isn't even half of the others. Putting it into perspective 406 people out of 594 were murdered without guns. This also tags their argument as silly because if you follow their logic the flip side of that coin is that it is okay to be murdered as long as it is not with a gun. It also assumes that had their not been a gun present another method would not have been used. Logically if someone is angered to the point of wanting someone dead do you honestly think not having a gun changes that? four hundred and six murders say otherwise.

I almost left out one of the most pernicious statement made by Chief Chabot of the Sûreté du Québec also president of CAPC? "All guns are potentially dangerous, all gun owners need to be licensed, all guns need to be registered, and gun owners need to be accountable for their firearms.". There are three ways to analyze this statement, if you follow the obvious logic he uses, then it could be said that everyone is a potential criminal therefore we should lock everybody up. We live in a society governed by the rule of law, the fundamental principle of that is the presumption of innocence until proved beyond a reasonable doubt otherwise. Again a statement designed to cultivate fear rather than reason. The second manner is the underlying bigotry that Mr Chabot possesses swap "gun owner" and "gun" for Jew, blacks, foreigners or any other ethnicity to read," All ____ are potentially dangerous, All ______ should be licenced and registered. All of a sudden the statement becomes less acceptable, less palatable to ordinary Canadians. Lastly Chief Chabot makes a very telling statement of himself he in fact is projecting his own fear of self onto guns and gun owners. Maybe he is the one who should in fact be disarmed? Firearms are inanimate objects they posses no will of their own and cannot influence human thought, they are after all just junks of metal, wood, and or plastic. They have no arms, legs nor consciousness. Are both the CAPC and CPA suggesting they do?

On a final note it is often said that we register cars, boats and children, This of course is true up to a point, There is not a law compelling anyone to do so. We do not have to register any of these. We do however have to register cars if we wish to drive on public roads, or want your boat recovered should it be stolen. We register our children if we wish to partake of the social benefits our society affords to us. A couple living in the boonies can deliver a child and never once have the local authorities come busting through their door with a warrant for their arrest and seizure of their offspring. (The Romani and donkuburs come to mind not that they don't have their scrapes with authorities). When you get a parking ticket or a ticket for a moving violation they do not automatically suspend your licence and seize all your cars and vehicles. Nor do you face criminal prosecution for a speeding ticket. We can also own as many and of different types able to travel at speeds well beyond the speed limits of most of our highways. Rarely is someone charged criminally when they have an accident even if someone dies in the crash. So no, we are not comparing things equally when make this observation. Oddly enough driving your car is not a right, where as keeping arms is.’’

A MESSAGE FROM LEAP

Have you noticed that there's been a great awakening about the harms of the "war on drugs"? The media and politicians are paying attention like never before.

I'm writing to tell you about a new way you can help keep this wave going and show your support for Law Enforcement Against Prohibition at the same time.

When I co-founded LEAP seven years ago I used to say I would not see the end of the "war on drugs" in my lifetime. But over these past weeks I've changed my mind about that, because things are changing. And fast.

Just look at all the media attention LEAP has been getting lately: 30-year veteran federal anti-drug agent Terry Nelson was recently on Anderson Cooper's CNN show, Judge James Gray was on Fox Business Channel and CNN, and LEAP speakers have recently been featured in newspapers like the Los Angeles Times, the Miami Herald and the Houston Chronicle.

More people are talking about the "drug war" than ever before, and you can help continue this conversation by wearing an official LEAP badge lapel pin just like our law enforcement speakers do. When you wear the LEAP shield, people will ask you about it, giving you the opportunity to talk about the harms of prohibition and invite them to join our movement.

Please go to http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=MtxIF5BV6XVb209vk%2BreE6yAi7OtaU7a right now and make a donation of just five bucks (or more, if you can afford it), and we'll mail you a badge so you can start wearing it and helping to build our movement.Of course, our efforts aren't just all talk. LEAP is making a real impact on prohibitionist policies both on a national level and regionally:

On Capitol Hill, Senator Jim Webb of Virginia just introduced a bill to create a blue ribbon commission to investigate whether we should keep sending so many people to jail for drugs (you and I already know we shouldn't, but the commission will help more politicians to realize it). This is exactly what LEAP's education specialist Howard Wooldridge has been advocating in the halls of Congress; last year, he met with all 535 congressional offices, asking them to create a commission -- and now it's happening!

In November, LEAP was proudly involved in helping pass - by a two-to-one margin - a voter initiative to decriminalize marijuana in Massachusetts. Now, citizens there no longer face arrest just for possessing small amounts.

These are just two examples of how our cops are making more of an impact than ever before. But we simply cannot do this important work by ourselves. We need your help.

Imagine for a moment what we can accomplish when thousands of citizens stand shoulder-to-shoulder with our law enforcers, not only with their dollars but by being advocates on the street and helping to build this movement through one-on-one conversations sparked by simple gold badges.

Please make a one-time donation or monthly pledge of just five dollars today to receive your official LEAP badge lapel pin.

Of course, it's great if you want to donate more, because we sure need it. It costs money to put our speakers in front of legislators, media and other audiences around the U.S. and the rest of the world. Whether you can give $5.00 or $500.00 to get your LEAP badge, this type of grassroots effort is how this movement has gained so much momentum and it's how we'll win the war against the "drug war." We will succeed because no one can make a legitimate argument against what our law enforcers and civilian supporters have seen with our own eyes. So please, show your support for LEAP today with a donation so you can show your support for LEAP tomorrow by proudly displaying our shield on your lapel, shirt, backpack or hat. It's fast, it's easy and it's time.

Sincerely,
Peter Christ

Co-Founder
Law Enforcement Against Prohibition

P.S. Five dollars probably isn't a lot of money to you, but it adds up to a lot for LEAP when combined with generous donations of hundreds or thousands of other supporters just like you, especially if those gifts are sustaining monthly pledges. So, please, go to http://org2.democracyinaction.org/dia/track.jsp?v=2&c=Zp%2FBFOi05MQZjWoUr0abCqyAi7OtaU7a to do your part by chipping in today.

THE YEAR THE CUPCAKE BECAME A KILLER

It is mind boggling how public health can justify their outrageous fear mongering using vulnerable children. Children take at face value anything they hear, see or read and can’t tell the difference between propaganda and fact. As if parents didn’t have enough in their hands to properly educate their children against a number of real dangers in society, they now have to fight exaggerated public health messages coming from their own government paid for with their own taxes.

Where, oh where will all this lead and when oh when will we see some measure and common sense return? No matter how hard we try to educate our children against hyperbole, no matter how forcefully we try to push back the message of extremists, our children are being indoctrinated by school, governments and their peers to be fearful of anything that is deemed unhealthy by public bureaucrats regardless of how counterproductive such messages have become. All one has to remember is how bulimia and anorexia now afflict children in their pre-puberty years.

In the following link you will read one example of such fear mongering tactics. C.A.G.E. has filed official complaints to different advertizing ethics commitees in the past for similar Canadian advertizements, but they somehow found a way to spin their way out of the necessary sanctions to be taken against the advertizers. Massive complaining however, can and will eventually make a difference. Please do not hesitate to officially complain to the proper authorities any time you consider that a message, public or not, has gone too far.

Knives out for 'death by fairy cake' advert

DR. KAMAL CHAOUACHI BLOWS THE WHISTLE ON TOBACCO KONTROL

We refer you to an interview Chris Snowdon from Velvet Glove Iron Fist did with Dr. Kamal Chaouachi.

Dr. Chaouachi, a world renown hookah tobacco expert analyst and an enemy of smoking bans, is outraged by what he observes is happening in Tobacco Kontrol and has become very vocal about it.

He doesn’t have too many good words for any of the Big Pharma puppets starting from the top with the WHO right down to the globalink community – a list serve comprised of approximately 6000 members who among other things give their version of ‘’expert’’ advice to the decision makers in various countries that want to follow the tobacco de facto prohibition trend.

None of it surprises us in the least, but it’s good to have it confirmed from yet another scientist from the inside. Let’s hope Dr. Chaouachi’s actions will motivate more and more conscientious scientists to blow the whistle. Compared to the anti-tobacco industry the tobacco industry is beginning to look like boy scouts.

A global prison?

DRUG PROHIBITION CAUSES MORE PROBLEMS THAN IT SOLVES

The logic is infallible. By making drugs illegal, you push them underground and create an uncontrollable market. Producers and suppliers cannot solve their problems with lawyers and letters, so they resort to guns and bullets. As long as there is a demand there will be competition to supply the users, and as long as it is illegal, the profits will be huge.

Attacking the demand by jailing drug users is creating a huge problem of prison overcrowding and the costly redirection of resources from other more important needs of society. People's lives are being ruined by Criminal Records in ways fare worse than any token drug use could ever amount to, and drug addicts are being jailed instead of receiving assistance and treatment.

The "War On Drugs" is a failure on almost every count. Certain Canadian provinces as well as Mexico realized how detrimental to society was this failed Drug policy, but failed to implement reform due to pressure from the U.S. and its all-powerful Drug Enforcement Agency.

Now that the U.S. Senate is preparing to take a hard cold look at the facts surrounding drug prohibition, it is important that all lovers of freedom and enemies of Nanny Interventionism speak up and be heard. We encourage you to write to Senator Jim Webb, as per the link provided below leading to an article from L.E.A.P. (Law Enforcement Against Prohibition), and voice your support for a more rational, logical approach to recreational drugs.

Finally, Congress discusses prohibition!

FORUM

FRANÇAIS À SUIVRE

We are happy to announce that through a collaboration between C.A.G.E., Citizens for Civil Liberties and mychoice.ca, we have now reestablished a public forum for our respective members and the public in general. Please don’t hesitate to register and invite your friends to join us in the sharing of ideas.

You can access it at: http://www.civilliberties.freeforums.org or by clicking on the icon FORUM on the right hand of this page.

Hope to read you there often.

Nous sommes heureux d’annoncer que nous avons rétablit un forum public pour l’usage de nos membres et le public en général. Le forum est le fruit d’une collaboration entre C.A.G.E., Citizens for Civil Liberties et monchoix.ca et nous invitons donc tous les membres de ces trois organismes de s’inscrire et inviter leurs amis d’en faire autant dans le but de partager nos idées.

Vous pouvez y accéder en cliquant ici : http://www.civilliberties.freeforums.org ou sur l’icône à la droite de cette page.

Au plaisir de vous y lire souvent.

CREATING POLICY ON FACT

Letter from one of our members to Mr. R. Liepert, Alberta Health Minister.

Our politicians should be flooded with letters such as this one. They can ignore a handful, but they cannot ignore hundreds and hundreds of them. Sending your letters regular mail will get more attention every time.

Mr. R. Liepert.
Health Minister
Province of Alberta

I heard Mr. Stelmach on the radio last week saying that our Provincial Government MUST base legislation on fact. Why, then, does the Government continue to keep the AlbertaTobacco Reduction law in force?

The anti-smoking lobby based the majority of it's campaign to pass these 'Freedom Crushing' laws on false information, as you are aware. Your administration did the same, using information from this lobby & Health Canada (whom also has lied to us.)

For example: "smoking causes lung cancer" (Health Canada). If this were true, all smokers would die of lung cancer-which they don't. A falsehood!

I've enclosed yet another link in the "false information chain" that proves the smoking laws in this province are based on anything BUT fact.(pdf-courtesy C.A.G.E.)

I ask you again to bring back the freedom of choice for Alberta's Business owners whether to allow smoking or not.

In these times, you would be bringing back some of Albertan's high level of morale which, in the past, has helped us turn things around. Not to mention restoring lottery-charity revenues generated at VLT machines, Casinos & Bingo halls. (This revenue is way down as you are also aware). People would have a CHOICE again.

Sincerely,
D. Watt

OUR PERSONAL LIVES ARE NO BUSINESS OF THE GOVERNMENTS

Support those who are truly and effectively investing time, effort and money into the fight for our personal freedoms and liberties.

Pierre Lemieux is one of those individuals par excellence, and he fights our battles on many different fronts.

Whatever your thoughts or feelings may be regarding firearms, the point of this constitutional challenge is important to us all: OUR PERSONAL LIVES ARE NO BUSINESS OF THE GOVERNMENT'S.This upcoming court case is quite important and senior members of C.A.G.E. will be there to support him.

FIREARMS LICENSING:
My love-life is no business of the government!

I am Paul Rogan, publisher of Canadian Access to Firearms, and a friend of Pierre Lemieux. I am helping raise money for Pierre Lemieux's fund in his challenge to the Canadian gun controls following the revocation of his right to have "armes for his defence" to paraphrase our English forebears. He will be in court in Mont-Laurier on May 26 and 27.

See http://www.pierrelemieux.org/ and especially http://www.libertyincanada.com/.
More details on Pierre's case are available at http://www.pierrelemieux.org/policecanada/cafc-cfc.html.

The gist of the case is that, in renewing "his" firearms licence (as he is forced to do every five years), Pierre refused to answer a question about his love life. Question 6(d) asks, "During the past two (2) years, have you experienced a divorce, a separation, a breakdown of a significant relationship, job loss or bankruptcy?" As an answer, he wrote, "My love affairs are none of your business." This form, like all the documents related to his case, is available on-line at the above address.

In the National Post of June 2, 2007, George Jonas wrote a column about Pierre's refusal to answer one of the intrusive questions. And Pierre himself wrote a column in the Ottawa Citizen of November 8, 2007.On December 1, 2007, Pierre received a registered letter from the Québec provincial police, which administers the federal gun control in cooperation with the RCMP's Miramichi bureaucracy. It was a "Notice of refusal to issue a firearms licence". The reason is clearly stated as his refusal to answer the intrusive question.

As a consequence, he was also notified that the "registration certificates" of his legally registered guns were revoked.

He filed a motion of appeal before the Québec provincial court. While he asks for the licence refusal to be quashed and apologies be issued, he argues that the Firearms Act and related Criminal Code provisions are unconstitutional, and that he does not need any licence to exercise his traditional liberties - his, and our, RIGHT to possess firearms.

His pro bono counsel is Richard A. Fritze, the well-known Alberta lawyer and committed defender of firearms owners and their rights. Financial support for travel and accommodation expenses, including for their high-powered expert witnesses, in what promises to be a long, difficult and protracted battle to reclaim our liberties is needed. The experts are all attending for only the cost of their travel and accommodations, a very generous donation in and of itself, but one which shows the level of dedication and commitment to this vital cause.

Pierre represents the best chance the gun community in Canada has had since Oscar Lacombe in 2001.

Already help is being pledged to his case (more details will be provided in my newspaper, Canadian Access to Firearms, regarding donors and expert witnesses). Richard Fritze is offering his time - for free at this stage of the proceedings (the Provincial Court) - a contribution worth over $50,000. My newspaper is giving three full pages of advertising, worth $500 each, and I have myself thrown another $500 cash in the pot. Mr. Barry Holland, has already donated $1,000. The Canadian Shooting Sports Associations (CSSA) has pledged $500. Other donations are starting to come in. But we need more.

We should be able to keep the out-of-pocket expenses to reasonable limits - we estimate we need around $10,000 in Provincial Court - again excluding Richard's time, which is provided free.

TAX DEDUCTIBILTY FOR ALL DONATIONS

All it will take is for 100 of us putting up $ 100, or 200 of us putting up $ 50.
Better, I suggest that you give $168, $268 (or $568), in "honour" of the 1995 Bill C-68 which brought us this infamy.

The Canadian Constitution Foundation (http://www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/) has graciously agreed to help us, so that any donor of $68 or more will receive a charitable tax receipt making the full donation deductible from your taxable income.

There are several ways to make your donation:

1) You can send your check directly to CCF:

Canadian Constitution Foundation
235, 3545 - 32 Ave. N.E., Suite 641
Calgary, AB Canada T1Y 6M6

Do not forget to indicate on your cheque that that you wish to donate to the "Pierre Lemieux Legal Fund".

2) Go to http://www.canadianconstitutionfoundation.ca/ and make your donation online credit card.
Go to "Donate to CCF"
Go to "Optional: Designation"
Mark the "Property rights research and court cases" tab, the fifth one down on "Optional Designation" .

ALL donations made under this option will be earmarked exclusively for the Pierre Lemieux's Defence fund.

If you want your donation to be reflected immediately in our statistics, feel free to send me an e-mail ( firearms@northwestel.net ) confirming the amount of your donatio.

Any money over and above what the April 26-27 court case will cost will be spent on the follow-up court battle - or on similar cases. If we win, it is certain the Crown will appeal. If we lose, we will appeal.I know we can do it!

My warm thanks to all for taking the time to acquaint yourself with this case! Looking forward to your kind and generous response!

Paul RoganPublisher of Canadian Access

Nota Bene: Please feel free to forward this appeal to anyone you know who is interested in this cause. With our warmest thanks!

WHO BETWEEN TOBACCO AND ANTI-TOBACCO IS EXACERBATING POVERTY?

Straight from the great masters of public health - the WHO - who in an overflow of limitless compassion and immense concern for these less than fortunate citizens of the world, they state:

‘’Tobacco and poverty are inextricably linked. Many studies have shown that in the poorest households in some low-income countries as much as 10% of total household expenditure is on tobacco. This means that these families have less money to spend on basic items such as food, education and health care. In addition to its direct health effects, tobacco leads to malnutrition, increased health care costs and premature death. It also contributes to a higher illiteracy rate, since money that could have been used for education is spent on tobacco instead. Tobacco's role in exacerbating poverty has been largely ignored by researchers in both fields.’’

So God bless them, among others, they came up with two of the most efficient solutions in their exemplary philanthropic efforts to save the most impoverished of the citizens of the world and their families. And this despite their incessant proclamations that tobacco addiction is comparable to heroin and cocaine addictions! (Emphasis ours)

Experience has shown that there are many cost-effective tobacco control measures that can be used in different settings and that can have a significant impact on tobacco consumption. The most cost-effective strategies are population-wide public policies, like bans on direct and indirect tobacco advertising, tobacco tax and price increases, smoke-free environments in all public and workplaces, and large clear graphic health messages on tobacco packaging. All these measures are discussed on the provisions of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.

And let’s not forget that they also refuse to hire smokers thus setting the trend for an ever increasing number of employers to do the same!

Who between tobacco and anti-tobacco is exacerbating poverty?

Why is tobacco a public health priority?

MORE ON THE E-CIGARETTES STORY

In the comment section of the article we link to below, the author posted this comment:

**I am the author of this piece, and there is a section missing at the end. Instead of: Michael Stearns, professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health, argues that:not "every e-cigarette supporter agrees with this theory." It should read: Michael Stearns , professor in the Social and Behavioral Sciences Department, Boston University School of Public Health, argues that: "The [anti smoking movement] is so heavily funded by Big Pharma that it cannot risk the loss of pharmaceutical profits, even if disallowing the experiment comes at the expense of a substantial number of human lives."

This and the fact that the senator that called for the e-cigarette ban has received 128 250 $ from pharmaceutical interests pretty well reveals the whole sordid story. The rest of the article is a must read as well.

Strange how Health Canada jumped on the bandwagon against e-cigarettes so quickly!

Want to tell the Minister of Health what you think of the way they protect pharma interests more than their citizens' well-being, you can write to this address: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/home-accueil/contact/minist-eng.php

Does Big Pharm Have Links to an Anti E-Cigarette Campaign?

** Correction: Mr. Dunsworth, author of the article, advises that Dr. Michael Stearns mentionned in his comment, should actually read Dr. Michael Siegel.

WHAT’S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE FOLLOW-UP

A follow-up to our post WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

Obviously Health Canada must think that e-cigarettes are worse than cigarettes, Chantix and Big Pharma nicotine inhalers since they have just issued a warning to anyone selling, importing, or advertising electronic cigarette products in Canada to stop doing so immediately. Either that or they are protecting Big Pharma interests above those of smokers. We tend to think that the latter is precisely the case. Bets are that when Big Pharma copies this invention, plenty of studies boasting the merits and safety of these devices will pop up in all their favorite medical journals.

Utterly contemptible!

Health Canada warns against 'e-cigarettes'

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS PICTURE?

The e-cigarette is a relatively new invention that delivers nicotine to its user without the combustion of tobacco while mimicking the ritual smokers find so hard to break. It offers the option to continue smoking so to speak, without incommodating by-standers who may be annoyed, intolerant, or afraid of second hand smoke and prevents its users from inhaling what public health qualifies as toxic fumes.

While tobacco remains a legal product no matter how hazardous they claim it is to health and some have pushed the paranoia to the point that even miniscule residues of smoke are now such a menace that at least one hospital has banned smokers (not smoking) from a maternity waiting room, there is increasing talk of the e-cigarette being outlawed.

You see, the problem is that this promising invention that offers an alternative solution to smoking and the smoking bans, is not marketed by Big Pharma. Smoking bans who have been fiinanced in terms of millions by pharmaceutical interests such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, are a gold mine to the pharmaceutical industry who market patches, inhalers, gums and killer drugs such as Chantix and anything that might even remotely compete with such products must be eliminated pronto! Legislators are undoubtedly agressively lobbied by Big Pharma to quickly make the e-cigarette illegal. While researchers are generously funded to produce anti-tobacco studies as the need arises, the WHO or other public health authorities do not seem to be too anxious to order a study on e-cigarettes albeit they are supposedly waiting for such studies before ruling on the future of e-cigarettes. They are relying on the makers of the e-cigarette to order such studies, as if they will put any credence into what their findings might be. Since Big Pharma increasingly advertizes gum and inhalers as a substitute when you can’t smoke (due to the smoking bans), you can imagine the hole e-cigarette will dig in their profits if it becomes popular because it is much more satisfying to smokers as many who have tried it claim.

Our corrupt and/or naive legislators and public health officials obviously believe that the same nicotine is healthy if delivered by a pharmaceutical company and dangerous if delivered by anyone else. We are amazed at how many pharmaceutical substitutes are not only government approved but even reimbursed in many cases even though some products are proven to be quite dangerous, such as Chantix which causes serious side effects including suicide. Medical and public health authorities profess that even something like Chantix is still better than smoking. Yet according to their contradictory logic, e-cigarettes are not better than smoking? Are they more dangerous than Chantix? What’s wrong with this picture?

Watch a news segment in the cleanairquality.blogspot

Read: Senator seeks to halt sales of 'e-cigarettes'

ANOTHER FEEL-GOOD USELESS LEGISLATION IN THE MAKING

With all the recent talk bringing us closer and closer to mandatory protective helmets in Quebec, we thought our readers might be interested to take a look at the other side of the story on how safe helmets really are.

First, a video of a segment of 20/20 with John Stossel discussing mandatory bicycle helmets and how they have actually proven to present more dangers to those who wear them than those who don’t. The segment also discusses the unintended consequences of other safety measures to which we are subjected to either voluntarily or by law.

View it here

Second, a review of medical literature on helmet efficacy from the National Ski Areas Association in Florida which points to various studies that show no significant reduced risk when wearing helmets than when not.

Read it here

Another ‘’feel-good’’ law in the making that will not contribute much to health and safety but that will most certainly contribute to remove yet another one of our freedoms.

Additional reading: LE PORT DU CASQUE BIENTÔT OBLIGATOIRE ? (French)

MANDATORY PROTECTIVE GEAR

ENHANCED DRIVER'S LICENSE NOW IN QUEBEC

Following in B.C.'s trails that test drove the Enhanced Driver’s License (EDL), Premier Jean Charest announced today that in the next few weeks, any Quebecer wishing to travel to the U.S., can obtain an EDL for 40 $ - much cheaper and convenient than a passport - he advertizes.

Convenient for who, is the question every citizen who chooses an EDL over a passport to save less than 8 $ a year, should be asking themselves while they still have the option. As contrary to a passport when the only time one usually carries it is when travelling outside of the country, the EDL will accompany each and every one of our moves every time we use our car or carry our wallet even if it’s just to go to the corner store. We don’t only allow our every step to the monitoring and recording of bureaucrats, but we open the door to future invasions of our privacy by employers, marketing firms, public health authorities, big corporations that will undoubtedly invent a reason to access our RFID for ‘’our own good’’ of course. It will undoubtedly become a dangerous assault to privacy much worse than the cell phone or the GPS. Obviously Quebec did not consider that it was a serious enough issue to consult or debate with the population before adopting the EDL. The sheep will obediently follow, is what Charest must have reflected when proudly showing off his own EDL - the very first issued in Quebec.

It is optional…for now. But how long before we are told that passports are a useless burden and will be totally abolished to be replaced by the EDL? And if you think that travelling to other countries would be difficult without a passport, take comfort in knowing that with globalization, it is more than probable that every country will eventually adopt EDL’s instead of passports.

By opting for such ‘’convenient solutions’’ without thinking of the future consequences, we get hopelessly trapped into accepting a state control that surpasses even Orwell’s fiction. Remember that albeit we can use our car without a GPS, a cell phone or our passport, driving without a driver’s license is quite inconvenient and costly! Say a resounding no to the ‘’convenient’’ EDL now while we still can!

New driver's licence will serve as proof of citizenship