Now let us suppose someone wanted to get a nice big juicy grant from one of the antismoking funds. And let's say they did a study showing that menthol cigarettes were more heavily advertised and discounted in black neighborhoods than Marlboros. Unfortunately though, that sort of research has probably all been pretty much done before and it would be written off as just basic known economics: corporations target their markets where people buy a lot of their products and might switch to other products without the advertising and discounting.

So.... no grant money for the unhappy researchers.

BUT... one of them comes up with a scathingly brilliant idea! If you go into those black neighborhoods you'll find black kids! And there may even be schools with more black kids as well! So instead of presenting your research as being about black NEIGHBORHOODS... you can present it as being about black SCHOOLS and black CHILLLLLDRENNNN!

Suddenly the gateway to a grant for 50, a hundred, maybe even several hundred thousand dollars is thrown open to you and you also have a prizewinner in having an eminently publishable study at a crucial political moment! Of course it would be good to examine the study itself to see who the funders were and how their research was structured, but since this article didn't mention that it had actually been published, my guess is that it HAS NOT been published. It's secret research, with unknown data, no peer review, no way for anyone to objectively examine its methodology ... but we're supposed to all take it on faith and push for the FDA to ban menthol cigarettes.

The saddest thing is that a Googling of this abomination, less than two full days after its release, already brings up close to 2,000 internet reproductions of this thing being played on various news media. No matter how ridiculous or shoddy or grant-seeking their research was ... it's been headlined as indisputable fact and broadcast into the homes of millions.

And all before anyone even gets to see it ... *IF* anyone *EVER* gets to see it since it may not ever even be published. These are the sort of "scientific" and propaganda games the Antismokers play all the time in pushing their bans and laws and taxes. They are based on clever wording, hard politics, money, and lies.

And they should be fought and resisted every step of the way for just that reason.

Michael J. McFadden,
Author of "Dissecting Antismokers' Brains"

Of 100 cigarette smokers surveyed, 75 of those who tried Camels prefer women.

Oddly, in Arab groups the numbers were reversed, Camels being more popular.

Earlier this morning I posted a comment about this news article and mistakenly claimed it had not been published. I would like to add an amendment/correction to my post: I finally found an article (at bizjournals.com) which referenced the study. It HAS INDEED BEEN PUBLISHED in the upcoming issue of the journal "Nicotine and Tobacco Research."

While far too many of these "studies" are what Dr. Michael Siegel (a leading antismoking researcher from Boston University who has lately become quite critical of antismoking advocacy techniques) calls "Science By Press Release" this particular study is exonerated in that regard.

My comments regarding the general proclivity of antismoking advocates to twists these sorts of studies to focus on children and minority groups in order to win public sympathy for political goals while increasing the chances of fat grants and journal publication stand however. All too frequently such researchers are swayed by either money or a misguided idealism to distort their work, findings, and/or presentations in pursuit of what they see as an ultimately desirable goal (the reduction of smoking) while the true science gets lost in the dust along the way. Read "The Lies Behind The Smoking Bans" at:

http://kuneman.smokersclub.com/PASAN/StilettoGenv5h.pdf

for more on that.

- MJM