Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MrFedEx" data-source="post: 4314365" data-attributes="member: 12508">Remember Big Tobacco and &quot;settled science&quot;? This is the exact term they used to employ when they would say there was &quot;no settled science that smoking causes cancer&quot;. They&#039;d hire lobbyists and lawyers and ex-football stars who would all say the same thing....&quot;no proof&quot;.So, people kept smoking and getting lung cancer and emphysema and dying because they believed the lies from the politicians from tobacco states, Big Tobacco, and the fringe scientists who could be bought-off to provide phony, flawed &quot;studies&quot; that could never seem to find a link between smoking and illness.Meanwhile, internal corporate documents show that Big Tobacco had known for years that smoking was both addictive and a killer. All of them knew full well what their products did and had known for decades. Same tactics, different subject. The &quot;merchants of doubt&quot; are still hard at work.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MrFedEx, post: 4314365, member: 12508"] Remember Big Tobacco and "settled science"? This is the exact term they used to employ when they would say there was "no settled science that smoking causes cancer". They'd hire lobbyists and lawyers and ex-football stars who would all say the same thing...."no proof". So, people kept smoking and getting lung cancer and emphysema and dying because they believed the lies from the politicians from tobacco states, Big Tobacco, and the fringe scientists who could be bought-off to provide phony, flawed "studies" that could never seem to find a link between smoking and illness. Meanwhile, internal corporate documents show that Big Tobacco had known for years that smoking was both addictive and a killer. All of them knew full well what their products did and had known for decades. Same tactics, different subject. The "merchants of doubt" are still hard at work. [/QUOTE]

Verification