“Look out, they might be on to us. Deflect! Deflect!”

One of the common attack/deflect methods of the various Righteous drones has always been to start out making accusations and threats, then, when they inevitably start losing the argument, they pretend to be the ones who are being accused and threatened.

This was around on the old Compuserve boards and it hasn’t changed yet.

Now that the cat is out of the bag – the tobacco template is obviously being applied across the board to the extent that ‘sugar is as bad as tobacco and booze’ – the Righteous use this same trick once again.

Smoke signals: Sugar industry needs to embrace moderation (like the rest of us)

By Caroline Scott-Thomas+, 11-Feb-2014

Sugar is not like tobacco. So why does the sugar industry keep borrowing tobacco industry terms?

Because those are the terms that are being thrown at them by you and your friends, Caroline. The sugar industry did not invent the rules of this battle.

She helpfully links to a ‘hysterical newspaper report‘ linking sugar to tobacco and alcohol – one of many – while ignoring the detail that the hysteria in those stories comes from the ‘scientists’ quoted within its paragraphs.

Funny she didn’t link to the one containing this particular quote –

American scientist Robert Lustig called for sweetened drinks and food to be regulated in the same way as tobacco.

There are many more out there along the same lines. So, Caroline, do you see now why the sugar industry thinks you want it as controlled and stamped on as the tobacco industry? It’s because you do, and your cohorts have stated so, in plain and unambiguous terms.

It’s no good trying the ‘We are the victims and they are the bullies’ game any more. It worked when only a limited number of people were able to see it in action at one time. It worked on those obscure message boards and chatrooms.

Now it’s in the newspapers, the newspapers are digital and they are archived for anyone to search through and read. No more ‘today’s news, tomorrow’s chip-wrapper’. It’s all there forever.

She closes with this line –

Everyone loves sugar. Unlike the tobacco industry, you’ve got nothing to worry about.

Be afraid, sugar industry. Be very afraid.


8 thoughts on ““Look out, they might be on to us. Deflect! Deflect!”

    • You can, however, make it explode into a sticky Napalm-like really vicious horrible thing. I still have the marks from childhood experimentation, when any kid could go into a hardware store or chemist and buy the stuff they’d learned about in chemistry that day.

      Back then, toy chemistry sets had real chemicals, a meths burner and no goggles. We learned the hard way – and it only took one of each lesson!

      There was one kid at school who made nitroglycerin in his bathtub at home and blew a crater in his garden, but then he was exceptionally mad and even we moderately lunatic ones kept clear of him. I think he was from Rhymney, where the occasional explosion and shower of dirt would probably still get no more comment than ‘Bloody kids’.

      I’ll say no more, or sugar will be banned entirely as a ‘potential terrorist weapon’.

      Guns? Pah. Who needs them?


      • Well they’ve banned the weedkiller already and, let’s face it, every known terrorist has consumed sugar at some point in their life so not only is it a “potential terrorist weapon” but quite obviously a mind-altering agent which leads to terrorist tendencies (in fact so are bread and milk according to the same statistical methods).

        A farmer friend was recently recounting a tale from his youth involving oxygen, acetylene, one of those 5 gallon plastic drums and a very big bang in the middle of a field. Nobody was hurt in the proceedings, although I’m not sure the same could be said for the ensuing bollocking. Try that now and I suspect you’d be getting some rather nasty visits from men with guns.


  1. Seems to me that a big danger here is if the sugar industry limply goes along with all this stuff by, in due course, ‘consenting’ to advertise on its packaging various horrors (provable or not!) associated with its product.

    As an occasional commenter here, you may remember me as a ‘sympathetic’ non-smoker. And, of course, I often come across the alarmist guff about passive smoking, and in particular, the latest hiatus regarding smoking in cars and the ‘cheeldren’.

    But I have to say the smoking industry does not help itself or its supporters when one sees, as I did a few weeks ago, at the duty-free counter on a cruise ship, piles of fags for sale, with the legend ‘Smoking damages your health and that of those around you’.


    • The slogans were forced on the tobacco companies without a shred of evidence in support of any of them. Antis don’t need proof, they just need tax money to pay for their threats.


    • They do. I tried one. It was useless.

      A better option would be a normal one with cigar-flavoured juice. That works pretty well, and there is probably no-nicotine cigar flavour available.


First comments are moderated to keep the spambots out. Once your first comment is approved, you're in.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s