Tobacco companies have long tried to cloud scientific research into the well-documented harmful effects of smoking. These companies have also produced counter arguments based on their own unconvincing "studies".
I think that investing in tobacco is almost as bad on the "unethical barometer scale" as investing in arms. But that´s another story.
Why stop at the obvious, and by now, well accepted? What about school sports, that give kids concussions, and yet overly-enthusiastic parents continue to attempt to hide the truth? Isn't this sports mania, among way too many parents, also bereft of morals?
People have a way of rationalizing whatever it is that they're addicted to. If one can rationalize (ab)using that tobacco, surely it's easy to rationalize investing in it, and to encourage others to become addicted.
Look how many decades it took to get smokers to quit invading and polluting everyone else's environment. Who was bereft of morals there? Just big tobacco? That's way too easy.
Well nuanced argument, Albert. For all that, I maintain that in spite of smokers polluting others´ space - awful - Big Tobacco must be held to account for telling lies and/or telling half truths. Paul
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Microbiology
- Scientific Research