Archiv der Kategorie: Smoking

C Frank Davis explains cancer death

C Frank Davis is a pro-smoking blogger from the UK. I’ve written some entries to this blog about his weird sights and statements he recently has put into his blog. Here’s the next one…

Two days ago well-known musician David Bowie died from cancer being 69 years of age. Bowie had battled liver cancer for 18 months before finally dying from the disease. Up to the year 2004 Bowie has been reported as an extremely heavy smoker. Then he quit because of a nearly fatal heart attack that stroke when he was performing at a festival in Scheeßel, Germany. The facts so far.

Every person with something more in the forehead than a vacuum would see a link of Bowie’s decade-long heavy smoking and the cancer he suffered from. Not so Mr Davis.  Heavy smoker Davis has got another explaination:

Until his brush with death [in 2004], Bowie, a long-time heavy smoker, insisted on a full English fry-up every weekend.

Now his wife of 20 years, Iman, prepares him a fat-free Sunday brunch of egg-white omelette with shiitake mushrooms and steamed asparagus.

And she told followers on Twitter earlier this year that she has replaced his favourite mashed potatoes with healthier — if less appetising — pureed cauliflower with non-fat sour cream.

Now we know what really killed him. Pureed cauliflower with non-fat sour cream. Them and the egg-white omelettes with shiitake mushrooms and steamed asparagus. And giving up smoking:

David Bowie was shocked by the timing of his near-fatal heart attack last year (04) – because he’d given up smoking six months previously.


As I have mentioned before. Mr Davis is strongly advised to see a doctor. He states:

Funny how he had a heart attack 6 months after stopping smoking. And never toured again, while presumably enjoying all the amazing health benefits of stopping smoking.

I’m just a year younger than David Bowie. I’ve never had a heart attack. And I’m still smoking, drinking whisky, and cooking fry-ups. I’ve cooked two in the past couple of weeks. Eggs, bacon, mushrooms, baked beans, and fried bread that’s absorbed all the lard and bacon fat in the pan (makes the pan a lot easier to clean). About the only thing missing was sausages and black pudding.

If I stopped smoking and started eating pureed cauliflower, I reckon I’d be dead within a week.

OK, it’s the usual bullshit from Mr Davis‘ feather. David Bowie was killed by trying to live healthy? Interesting and convincing. And Mr Davis still feels healthy (he surely is NOT) because he smokes, consumes hard drinks and eats more fat then recommended? Also interesting.Lemmie Kilmister comes into my mind who died two weeks ago. Two days after he was diagnosed with heavy cancer from smoking an drinking excessively for decades.

So, it was not smoking that David Bowie’s cancer attributes to? Let’s leave the Davis‘ crap and turn to science. Liver cancer has one main risk factor. You guess what thiscould be? See this page:

Study: Smoking Dramatically Increases Liver Cancer Risk

Article date: November 2, 2011

By Stacy Simon

A new study reinforces the link between liver cancer and the risk factors of smoking, obesity, and heavy drinking.

Researchers from the US and Europe studied 125 liver cancer patients to determine what risk factors were contributing to their disease. They compared them to 229 people without cancer who were matched by age, gender and other factors. The participants were all part of a European study group that was formed so researchers could investigate the role of biological, dietary, lifestyle and environmental factors in the development of cancer and other chronic diseases.

They found that almost half the cases of liver cancer in the study were associated with smoking, 16% were associated with obesity and 10% were associated with heavy alcohol consumption. Almost 21% of cases were associated with hepatitis C and 13% with hepatitis B.


Any questions what killed David Bowie?




3 Kommentare

Verfasst von - 12. Januar 2016 in Cancer, Uncategorized


Schlagwörter: , , , ,

The „Black-lung-lie“-lie: How smoker lobbyists lie on behalf of lung cancer and smoker’s leg

(Die deutsche Version dieses Artikels steht hier)

I regularly observe the well known internet channels of the usual suspects amongst the smoker’s lobby groups. Sometimes I find articles that are hard to beleive. Stupid, crazy, close to insanity. But the ultimate bullshit occurs when smokers claim that smoking is not dangerous or even healthy. Sometimes they even present „studies“ or other „scientific“ material as a proof for what they say. And then, due to the fact that I love to investigate, I try to go behind the stories that have been published in favour of lung cancer and smoker’s leg. Let’s find out what is going on with this bunch of stupid excuse for the deadly habit.

Here is one of them:

„Smokers against discrimination“ is a well known desinformation page available on facebook. Recently they posted this article that has been copied later on a German facebook equivalent named „Raucher in Deutschland“:


The „Black-lung-lie“-lie

The German re-poster, Frank Schneidereit, commented: „Sounds sensible“. OK, then let’s see what is „sensible“ about the fact that for example they argue that 80% of lung cancer patients are non-smokers:

One of the citations in the text goes:

Dr. Victor Buhler, Pathologist at St. Joseph Hospital in Kansas City: “I have examined thousands of lungs both grossly and microscopically. I cannot tell you from exmining a lung whether or not its former host had smoked.”

Even when you scan the internet carefully you will never find the origin of the quoting. All that you’ll find are citations of this sentence that Mr. Buhler is claimed to have said once. All from pro-smoking sources. And, next question, when was „once“? And has he said this in reality? Or is it just wishful thinking of the lung cancer fanatics? Dr Victor Buhler can not tell us. He died in the year 1983 as an article in an American local newspaper says (Link). His death was over 32 years ago!

Next thing, a similar case:

“Dr. Duane Carr – Professor of Surgery at the University of Tennessee College of Medicine, said this: “Smoking does not discolor the lung.”

Dr Duane Carr died in the year 1993 (Link) after suffering from longer illness. No original quoting again. Only recitations on smoker’s lobbyist websites. Looks like deja vu.

Next forgery of the smoker’s groups:

‘Nearly 80% of people diagnosed with lung cancer now, in 2012, are non-smokers.’

Those who are engaged in the anti-smoking debate know: This is mere bullshit. Vice versa it makes sense: 80 to 90% of all incidents of lung cancer are related to smoking tobacco. First, let’s check the website that is linked behind the statement. You can see at first glance that this website is of an American doctor who is concerned with treating cancer patients, particularly lung cancer victims. Would she tell such incredible BS? Press Ctrl-F and search for the 80%-statement on the website. And you’ll find…NOTHING.

When the website is skimmed briefly a link can be seen at the top of the article leading to lung cancer related articles on this site. There expectedly is not one article that says that 80% of lung cancer patients are non-smokers. But on page 3 of the list there is an article dealing with risk factors for bronchus (i. e. lung) cancer. And the figures there look „slightly“ different:

Smoking is responsible for at least 80% of lung cancer deaths in the United States. (Source)

Ooops, just the other way round. Not 80% of  the lung cancer cases are in non-smokers but they are related to smoking. I’m a little bit confused, I have to concede.

The other sources in the „Smoker’s against discrimination“ posting, mainly „“, are not worth being examined. „“ in particular is a conspiracy blog based on the desinformation material once published by a certain Joe Vialls. If you understand German, switch to an article on „psiram„, a German group opposing conspiracy theorists..

Well, not it’s time to draw a conclusion. What can radical lung cancer fanatics (i. e. hardcore smokers) do if there is no scientific proof that their habit, or better say „their addiction“, is harmless? The easiest way: Invent something that looks like a scientific proof. Find some academic staff (if they are already dead, it’s even better because they can’t complain about having become victim of a forgery quoting) and put the words that you’d like to hear into their mouth. That’s all folks. There are lots of idiots going to believe you. Most of them carry a cancer stick between their lips while they’re reading your „scientific stories“.


Schlagwörter: , , , ,