I have to take issue with Peter Lavac's letter headlined 'Time to boot out smoking' (South China Morning Post, May 15). First, the idea of governments being able to dictate personal habits is atrocious; this government is in danger of creating a climate of fear around smoking which leads to a cavalier disregard for facts and evidence. Once on this road, you're not supposed to ask questions.
As far as the report on a government 'survey' ('75pc support proposed smoking ban', South China Morning Post, May 14) is concerned, no one asked me or any of my friends what we thought. More details would be welcome. Having worked for some time in market research, I know very well how questionnaire results can be manipulated.
Mr Lavac cites 'overwhelming medical evidence linking direct and passive smoking to lung cancer . . . and other preventable diseases'. Well, he must know something we don't - since when have these illnesses been 'preventable'?
And as for his 'overwhelming medical evidence', according to Freechoice, the magazine published by Forest (Freedom Organisation for the Right to Enjoy Smoking and Tobacco): 'A team from Warwick University reports that the danger of passive smoking has been greatly exaggerated because the anti-smoking lobby simply ignores those reports - 23 at the last count - which can find no link between passive smoking and lung cancer.' No doubt the anti-smokers believe their cause is so good they are justified in lying by omission to support it.
Forest also reports that trials at the University of Vermont College of Medicine have shown what many people have known for some time - that nicotine might be effective in the treatment of Parkinson's disease. The benefits, reported by BBC Online, were seen in three areas: mental attentiveness; body control in walking and use of hands; and reduced anxiety. With the third of these benefits in mind, perhaps Mr Lavac should have a 'ciggie'.
Twice he calls non-smokers the 'silent' majority, but there can surely be few more vociferous groups than anti-smoking organisations Cosh (Hong Kong Council on Smoking and Health) or Ash (Action on Smoking and Health), based in Britain. And I would estimate from your letters page that there are at least four anti-smoking letters for every one pro-choice.
