![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
If there’s one thing I hate more than the news people, it’s the advertisers. Not all advertisers are evil, I’ll grant you (there are commercials I find truly funny and *gasp* even enjoy a little) but the ones that really get under my skin are the preachy ones. Yes, I’m looking at you ‘Truth’ ads.
Look, I don’t have a problem with people being anti-smoking. We all know smoke is just plain not good for you, whether it’s cigarette smoke, smog, or even the smoke from a burning building. But I think it’s a little funny that you’re poking at the tobacco lobby about their ‘half-truths and lies’ when your commercials twist the ‘facts’ just as much as they do.
Let’s look at your most recent ad, where you state that the tobacco lobby claimed that exposure to secondhand smoke is less harmful that drinking a glass or two of whole milk a day. You go to a dairy farm and the farmer’s all confused, because there’s nothing unhealthy about milk, is there? And smoke is evil.
You know what? If I drank a glass or two of whole milk a day it would be more harmful to me that my typical exposure to secondhand smoke. So who’s lying now? Oh, you don’t think it would be? Well, let’s examine your logic.
First, what’s a ‘glass’? In today’s ‘super-sized’ lifestyle, a ‘glass’ is typically 16 ounces. That’s 2 cups. Now we tackle ‘a glass or two’ – let’s say 1 ½ glasses per day, 24 ounces of whole milk. Up against… whose typical exposure to secondhand smoke? Mine? A casino worker’s? A child’s? Every person has a varying degree of exposure, there’s no ‘norm’. But in my case, I’m only exposed if I go to a casino or bar, which is rare. So the exposure I have is probably far less harmful to me than if I went to live in one of California’s smoggy cities.
So negligible health risks for me on the secondhand smoke – but how, you ask, can milk be harmful? At best the commercial is trying to compare people with high levels of exposure to something harmless, and that’s still wrong, right? Not exactly. There’s something about the commercial that caught my ear. ‘Whole Milk’. They specified whole milk. And it’s not because they were insinuating there are harmful chemicals in milk, no, not at all. What’s considered the largest growing (no pun intended) health ‘epidemic’ in the country? Um-hm, obesity. What does whole milk have? Lots of calories.
If I consumed 24 ounces (450 calories) of milk every day for a year, and changed nothing else, I’d gain 46 pounds. 46 pounds! And considering how much that would raise my risk of diabetes (which runs in my family), heart disease, and other obesity-related conditions, I think milk is a lot more hazardous to me than the minimal amount of secondhand smoke I’m exposed to. And multiply that by ten years… or twenty…
Look, I don’t think the message is wrong – smoking is bad for you, but then again, so are a lot of things. But if you’re going to argue against it – especially using the word ‘truth’ as your campaign name, doesn’t it behoove you to tell the actual truth? Isn’t there enough truth to the fact that ‘smoking is unhealthy’ to run a campaign? Why do you have to twist other people’s words and feed us your propagandized version of the ‘facts’?
As you obviously have no respect for my intelligence, I have no respect for you.
Smokers of the world, light one up for me, would you?
Look, I don’t have a problem with people being anti-smoking. We all know smoke is just plain not good for you, whether it’s cigarette smoke, smog, or even the smoke from a burning building. But I think it’s a little funny that you’re poking at the tobacco lobby about their ‘half-truths and lies’ when your commercials twist the ‘facts’ just as much as they do.
Let’s look at your most recent ad, where you state that the tobacco lobby claimed that exposure to secondhand smoke is less harmful that drinking a glass or two of whole milk a day. You go to a dairy farm and the farmer’s all confused, because there’s nothing unhealthy about milk, is there? And smoke is evil.
You know what? If I drank a glass or two of whole milk a day it would be more harmful to me that my typical exposure to secondhand smoke. So who’s lying now? Oh, you don’t think it would be? Well, let’s examine your logic.
First, what’s a ‘glass’? In today’s ‘super-sized’ lifestyle, a ‘glass’ is typically 16 ounces. That’s 2 cups. Now we tackle ‘a glass or two’ – let’s say 1 ½ glasses per day, 24 ounces of whole milk. Up against… whose typical exposure to secondhand smoke? Mine? A casino worker’s? A child’s? Every person has a varying degree of exposure, there’s no ‘norm’. But in my case, I’m only exposed if I go to a casino or bar, which is rare. So the exposure I have is probably far less harmful to me than if I went to live in one of California’s smoggy cities.
So negligible health risks for me on the secondhand smoke – but how, you ask, can milk be harmful? At best the commercial is trying to compare people with high levels of exposure to something harmless, and that’s still wrong, right? Not exactly. There’s something about the commercial that caught my ear. ‘Whole Milk’. They specified whole milk. And it’s not because they were insinuating there are harmful chemicals in milk, no, not at all. What’s considered the largest growing (no pun intended) health ‘epidemic’ in the country? Um-hm, obesity. What does whole milk have? Lots of calories.
If I consumed 24 ounces (450 calories) of milk every day for a year, and changed nothing else, I’d gain 46 pounds. 46 pounds! And considering how much that would raise my risk of diabetes (which runs in my family), heart disease, and other obesity-related conditions, I think milk is a lot more hazardous to me than the minimal amount of secondhand smoke I’m exposed to. And multiply that by ten years… or twenty…
Look, I don’t think the message is wrong – smoking is bad for you, but then again, so are a lot of things. But if you’re going to argue against it – especially using the word ‘truth’ as your campaign name, doesn’t it behoove you to tell the actual truth? Isn’t there enough truth to the fact that ‘smoking is unhealthy’ to run a campaign? Why do you have to twist other people’s words and feed us your propagandized version of the ‘facts’?
As you obviously have no respect for my intelligence, I have no respect for you.
Smokers of the world, light one up for me, would you?
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}