Comment by 01Parzival10 on 08/08/2022 at 13:44 UTC

219 upvotes, 15 direct replies (showing 15)

View submission: …

Why ask them and not scientists?

Replies

Comment by john_rabb at 08/08/2022 at 13:45 UTC

138 upvotes, 1 direct replies

Now that’s a good fucking question

Comment by Raccoon_Full_of_Cum at 08/08/2022 at 15:28 UTC

45 upvotes, 3 direct replies

Fun fact: the whole reason why the term "Type A personality" exists is because of tobacco companies buying scientists.

You see, around the 1950s, scientists were starting to notice that people who smoked were far more likely to die of heart disease than people who didn't. Seeing the threat to their profits, the tobacco industry hired two scientists conduct some "studies" that classified all humans as either "Type A's" (aggressive and stressed out all the time) or "Type B's" (laid back and more easy going).

They then argued that Type A people were more likely to smoke than Type B's, which allowed them to dismiss the heart disease claims as a result of the "inherently stressful lifestyles" that Type A's led, rather than being the result of tobacco smoking.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%5C_A%5C_and%5C_Type%5C_B%5C_personality%5C_theory#Funding%5C_by%5C_tobacco%5C_companies[1][2]

1: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type%5C_A%5C_and%5C_Type%5C_B%5C_personality%5C_theory#Funding%5C_by%5C_tobacco%5C_companies

2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_A_and_Type_B_personality_theory#Funding_by_tobacco_companies

7 decades later, these bullshit "studies" that were entirely invented by the tobacco industry are still around, masquerading as actual science.

Comment by ProbablyMaybe69 at 08/08/2022 at 14:11 UTC

38 upvotes, 5 direct replies

This pandemic unfortunately proved that many Americans think scientists and doctors are against them... sad.

Comment by CaspianRoach at 08/08/2022 at 14:38 UTC

6 upvotes, 1 direct replies

To get them to lie on record so you can later introduce evidence of them actually knowing the correct answer beforehand and hiding it (perjury).

Comment by slayer828 at 08/08/2022 at 15:46 UTC

3 upvotes, 0 direct replies

I mean I personally would have asked them as well. I would then cite each of their companies doing animal testing on nicotine in the 50's. Try each of them for lying under oath, and fine each of their companies large sum of money.

Comment by assisianinmomjeans at 08/08/2022 at 14:52 UTC

3 upvotes, 1 direct replies

Scientists said it did. BT said they have more evidence that it didn’t.

Comment by [deleted] at 08/08/2022 at 15:07 UTC

3 upvotes, 0 direct replies

That’s what I’m thinking. Wtf do they know?

Comment by [deleted] at 08/08/2022 at 16:40 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

It‘s as smart as asking an ice cream dealer if sugar is healthy. They have no incentive to tell the truth.

Comment by gvsteve at 08/08/2022 at 17:19 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Honestly? To make the CEOs look bad by their obvious lying.

Comment by k1nt0 at 08/08/2022 at 18:23 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

You say that as if scientists aren't easily bought.

Comment by [deleted] at 08/08/2022 at 19:06 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

see the current global heating crisis and you'll find the answer

Comment by eoliveri at 08/08/2022 at 22:23 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

Because it's political theater, not a real fact-finding mission.

Comment by Bababowzaa at 09/08/2022 at 07:12 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

That's not how court works.

Stop being smart and giving us reasonable and amazing ideas. We gotta listen to the people with the most money. Not the people that actually know how this works.

Let me repeat: money. Not science, but money.

Comment by ellaphantzgerald at 09/08/2022 at 09:49 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

I think this is them stating that they didn’t know that tobacco was addictive. Which is total bullshit. They knew. This is from the Phillip Morris case (I believe) and the case was mostly about proving that they knew how terrible cigarettes were for people and purposely misled the public.

Comment by maburnham2 at 05/02/2024 at 15:41 UTC

1 upvotes, 0 direct replies

There’s so much that goes into this but just a quick couple of things. Scientists spent decades trying to figure out what causes the cancer in cigarettes. For the longest time, they argued the nicotine was cancer causing. Which it isn’t , so they lost a lot of credibility. It wasn’t until the 1990s that they could prove with science that cigarettes are harmful to your health. Also as someone said here money, tobacco money was one of the most profitable industries for 100s of years. There is so much money in the product and right now there even more money in the anti, tobacco legislation.