HomeHealth & MedicineSPORT & THE LOONEY MEDICS



  1. " If by using their undoubted influence they should stop drinks sponsorship  for example, then they should be made to personally pay for any fall-out that happens as a result. By this I mean, should Munster Rugby find themselves unable to pay the team salaries then the advising health experts should be made to pay them out of their own interfering pockets. "


    John, one of my favorite pokes at the Antis here in the US is to offer them Challenges and then watch them run away faster than little girls from packs of tarantulas.  One of my favorite challenge is The Money Challenge.  It goes like this post I made to help Bill Hannegan's bar/casino ban fight in St. Louis back in January…

    The funny thing about these legislators and antismoking groups that want bans and who tell bar/casino owners that their businesses won't be hurt actually have a VERY easy way to get the bans they desire. All they have to do is give the owners written legal guarantees that they will cover the losses, the losses they claim won't happen, out of their own pockets! Hey, if they're telling the truth they'll have nothing to lose, right? And meanwhile the opposition will crumble and they'll have their bans as easy as cake!

    Why the hell WOULDN'T they do that, eh?

    Simple: Because they're lying — and they KNOW they're lying.

    Otherwise they'd do it in a heartbeat.

    Instead, they run away faster than a little girl from a pack of tarantulas.


    And, of course, just like the several dozen other times I've made that particular challenge: not a whisper of a ghost of a spark of a response from the Antis.    It's so simple, and so clear, and so TOOOOTALLLLLY not something they will EVER accept: they want OTHERS to pay for their follies… they themselves know better.

    – MJM

    • MJM,

      It is ALWAYS a case of a funding bias and therefore any risk to the personal pocket is to be avoided.

      It’s all a merry-go-round as long as it pays you but if there was a suggestion it could cost you, then convictions fly out of the window.

  2. I enjoyed rugby when I was a lad (I usually played fly half), particularly when the ground was a bit soggy and absorbed some of the impact. I  sometimes wonder how the drains in the communal school showers coped with thirty boys caked in mud jettisoning half the rugby pitch down the plughole!

    Not so much fun was playing on a well churned pitch which had been frozen solid by sub-zero temperatures. That hurt.

    There's a great cartoon by  Matt in the DT today on this subject:


  3. In defence of the medical profession I feel obliged to point out that a quick analysis of the signatories reveals that only 3 of the 73 appear to be practicing medics. The rest are for the most part public health "experts" and sociologists, which explains a lot. 

    We have the press to thank for the misleading use of the word “doctors” to describe this academically challenged bunch of activists.

    • Chris,  

      I do not know if you are a member of that noble profession or not but I, for one, have an uneasy relationship with the white coat brigade. On the one hand I have met truly wonderful medical people both doctors and nurses whom I admired and was grateful to for many reasons. As a freedom fighter for the smoker though I have also encountered the ugly side of medicine with vested interests in positions of power using contempt and patronizing as tools to quiet any question of their moral authority. It is these self-appointed white coats in Public Health and the Charities I attack in my scribblings, not the down-to-earth intelligent ones I have met twice now on the hospital wards and certainly not my G.P.

      • I completely agree John. Good medics are too busy practicing their art to indulge in politics. On a personal level I have huge respect for such people but the medical establishment is a different matter. It is not a meritocracy and those who rise to positions of public prominence rarely do so because they are the best in their profession. Sadly, they are often treated as such by the MSM and politicians. 

        In this case, I was merely trying to highlight the lazy and inaccurate reporting of this non-story buy the MSM. The Guardian printed the list of signatories and it consists mostly of sociologists and public health types gleaned from all over the world. So 73 nonentities from a population of billions try to destroy a popular sport and this is headline news?

        For the record, I am not a medic. I have spent most of my career working in medical research /diagnostics mostly for commercial companies. We are the people who work with scientists and medics to create the tools that assist them to make the useful breakthroughs that are reported as welcome if occasional interruptions in the flow of seemingly endless unscientific effluence that gushes from the public health industry.

        • We are of like mind then Chris.

          I relate to the medical profession much in the same way I do to the security services. I obey the laws, (mostly), so I do not have the need to talk to a policeman unless I need a passport renewed or something like that. Neither do I speak much to doctors unless I am making a scheduled visit to check something with them. I can meet either over a pint and talk politics or sport happily. It is public health that wants to interfere with my way of life unnecessarily, hence my loathing for each and every one of those leeches.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

HTML tags allowed in your comment: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>