https://preview.redd.it/z8j8jzqps5xb1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=49bbb0b7db8f79530b283fc6030f5ea458b17ee9
While Halloween may seem like pure fun and frights, the beloved holiday has also left a lasting mark on our language. As English absorbed Halloween traditions from Celtic harvest festivals to Catholic vigils, it expanded with new words and expressions. From jack-o’-lanterns to trick-or-treating, Halloween introduced vocabulary we still utter today. Delving into the etymology shows how this spooky day of devils and spirits seeped into our lexicography to evolve English in curious ways.

Celtic Roots

Modern Halloween stems from the ancient Celtic festival Samhain, whose Gaelic name became the basis for numerous terms. Samhain marked the transition from summer to winter on November 1st when Celts believed boundaries weakened between the living and dead.
The ominous caldron where witches brewed potions got its name from the cauldron used at Samhain to sacrifice animals and summon spirits. Even the term witch derives from the Old English “wicca” linked to pagan sorcery. And the Scottish word “glamour” referring to magical charm springs from rituals practiced by “druids” on Samhain eve.

The Early Christian Influence

As Christianity spread, the church designated November 1st All Saints’ Day to honor martyrs and the deceased faithful. The night before became All Hallows’ Eve, a name still echoed in the holiday eve “Halloween.”
The Middle English term All Hallows’ referred to saints deemed holy within the Catholic faith. The evening vigil incorporated lighting candles on graves to guide spirits — a tradition resurrected in modern day jack-o’-lanterns.
These Christian reinterpretations transformed Samhain into a night associated with menacing evil spirits. Guarding against malevolent ghosts influenced Halloween customs like wearing frightening masks for disguise.

The Pumpkin Patch

Carving pumpkins as decorative lamps comes courtesy of Irish immigrants fleeing potato famine in the 1800s. Using abundant squash as lanterns resembled the Celtic practice of hollowing out turnips and beets for candlelight.
The name jack-o’-lantern also has Irish origins. Per folklore, Stingy Jack trapped between heaven and hell wandered with only a carved radish lit by hellfire to guide his way. Jack became shorthand for a spectral guide.

Trick-or-Treating

The Middle English “treten” meaning to behave toward also gave us the “trick or treat” custom of going door-to-door. Up to the 20th century, this often involved pranks and mischief toward homeowners not offering treats.
One theory suggests the gifts appeased fantasy creatures like elves, fairies and goblins who would otherwise play tricks. food was left out to bring prosperity.

Costumes from Scary to Silly

Halloween costumes once skewed toward animal skins and frightening personas to drive away spirits. But increased commercialization in the 1900s made attire more fun than fearsome.
Companies like Ben Cooper created pop culture costumes of everything from pirates and princesses to Superman and Spongebob. The word “cosplay” emerged to describe elaborate costume roleplaying. Dressing up became integral to Halloween’s appeal.
https://preview.redd.it/jwcoappqs5xb1.png?width=1920&format=png&auto=webp&s=e120422734bd59727d6f969763d06f0df76954fb

Party On!

Halloween’s party tradition dates back to Irish wakes to honor the dead. But modern day Halloween bashes are more about lively socializing than somber memorials.
The Scottish poet Robert Burns hosted riotous Halloween parties with storytelling, music and dancing. Today’s parties carry the lively spirit along with bobbing for apples, candy feasting and showing off costumes.

Spooky Superstitions

Folk rituals and superstitions surrounding Halloween became ingrained in the English language. We warn people to “keep away the goblins” to safeguard against danger. “Don’t let the ghosts haunt you” implies leaving behind bad memories. And if someone appears pale, we say they look “like death warmed over”.
Our lexicon adopted Halloween’s spiritual mysticism. The term “haunted” is now firmly rooted in English with ghostly associations thanks to All Hallows’ Eve.

Macabre and Morbid Fascination

Halloween’s focus on darkness and the taboo imbued English with words related to the creepy and morbid. The gothic literature genre gained terminology like “ominous,” “macabre,” and “malevolent.”
Graveyard poetry and chilling stories drew on unsettling Halloween themes. The famous poem “The Raven” is forever linked to Halloween eeriness. The holiday’s blend of darker concepts contributed atmospheric terms to the language.

Candy Cravings

As Halloween became more family-friendly in the 1900s, candy became the treat of choice for trick-or-treaters. Chocolate and sugar titans like Hershey’s and Brach’s fed the Halloween candy craze.
Brand name confections like Milk Duds, Candy Corn, and M&Ms became ingrained in family traditions. Phrases like “candy overload” arose from the mass sugar consumption each Halloween. Dentists even took out ads with slogans like “Halloween over? Candy Overload?” to highlight candy’s effects.

Skeletons in Popular Culture

Skeleton motifs trace back to sugar skull candies honoring the dead in Mexico’s Dia de Los Muertos rites. But skeleton imagery exploded in pop culture through characters like “Skeleton Jack” and “Bone Janggel.”
The “skeleton dance” became an early film genre with characters frolicking as skeletons. “Skeleton Key” became shorthand for solving a tricky problem. Skeletons remain icons of the holiday, even showing up in Halloween memes.
From pumpkins to pranks, to witches and skeletons, Halloween suffused global culture and the English language itself with spooky motifs and vocabulary. Next time you use terms like “trick-or-treat” or “haunted house” think of their Halloween origins! Your speech channels the ancient festival still thriving today.
Read in our blog about the Hidden Gems of Spanish

Hello and welcome back to SAR! This post is the second part to our series looking at cigarettes and the history of the tobacco industry. While reading part one isn’t required for understanding this post, it provides a lot more context about the war that would be waged in people’s mouths and lungs. Most of the information in this post comes from the brilliant Allan M. Brandt in his book The Cigarette Century, 2013. This book is a fantastic read and I highly recommend picking up a copy and learning about all of the things I wasn’t able to describe—Brandt does a great job and he deserves all the credit for his research. So where did we leave off? The world was entering the 1950s and trying to figure out what a world post-WWII would look like. Even though the war ended officially in May 1945, governments weren’t ready to let all the soldiers come home from the front and the process of demobilization would take time in the European and Pacific theaters. This led to a massive cultural shift as soldiers returned home, found wives, and moved out West into sprawling new developments. And the cigarette moved from the muddy fields of France and the close quarters of ship decks into the quaint homes of middle America.
​
https://preview.redd.it/lq77gxpi2xp91.png?width=580&format=png&auto=webp&s=98406c3f6b184180a72b478e5d6b74d724decf4b

• Remember that at this time there were five major brands that made up the majority of the Cigarette industry: American Tobacco’s Lucky Strikes; Liggett & Myers’ Chesterfields; R.J. Reynolds’ Camels; Lorillard’s Old Gold; and Phillip Morris’ Philip Morrises (yes he named his cigarette after himself). These five brands made up over 80% of the total cigarette industry and hauled billions in revenue each year and dished out millions in advertising. In fact by the 1930s, the majority of a cigarette company’s expenses were marketing and this was the reason why smaller brands were crushed—they just couldn’t spend the money to compete. One of the big advertising claims at the time was the health benefits of cigarettes over other indulgences like candy. Lucky Strikes’ “Reach for a Lucky” campaign encouraged consumers to reach for a cigarette instead of a sweet when they had a craving and they would watch the pounds slip off. Old Gold launched a similar campaign stating that customers should “Eat a Chocolate, Light an Old Gold and Enjoy Both!” It would be Camel’s though that stepped up the claim game:
  • In 1946 R. J. Reynolds started a new promotion stating that “More Doctors Smoke Camels than Any Other Cigarette” which would become one of the most famous (and infamous) slogans in the company’s history. Next to the quote would be handsome doctors in pristine white coats in both newspapers and medical journals. In fact, at the 1947 American Medical Association (AMA), doctors formed lines hundreds long at cigarette booths to claim free samples of cigarettes perfectly crafted for the brightest minds. And who could blame them? By this time the cigarette industry had 50 years of practice targeting certain groups of people and influencing them—to be a real doctor is to enjoy a cigarette and eventually their patients expected them to be smokers as well. Additional claims that life saving discoveries were always by doctors that smoked Camels further supplanted Camels as the cigarette of the elite.
  • Despite the claims that doctors liked cigarettes, and the claims were true, people were suspicious of the ‘clean’ nature of cigarettes. Any smoker knows that there are changes to the body pretty quickly after starting to smoke and although the true dangers of cigarettes weren’t known, people suspected something. Ever since the 1890s people were making claims about the unhealthy nature of cigarettes and the Temperance Movement (1910-1933) was a big proponent of driving the research. Unfortunately it was eugenists, people who believed in the pseudoscience that certain people of ‘good attributes’ were better than others, that spouted the most information about cigarette harms.

​
https://preview.redd.it/azloofik2xp91.png?width=689&format=png&auto=webp&s=ef3f7c0b14359d6c1cf24d7b12b86e9e65f0ce78

• While the physical effects of cigarettes were pretty universal, it was the moral aspects of smoking that, apparently, affected certain groups more than others. In a lot of ways smoking became the common thread among the less desirable groups in society: Lucy Page Gaston, the leader of the anti-cigarette movement, used doctors to purport that people of ill repute smoked cigarettes more than moral people. Questions arose about if cigarettes caused degeneracy or if smoking was a symptom of being a degenerate. Was the cigarette a sign of relaxed morals or does being young and dumb mean that you’re likely to smoke? Many doctors came out against cigarettes saying that the effect on the brain and spinal cord was more likely to put young people in jail and have “more potent causes of physical, mental, or moral degeneracy that is fast filling our jails with criminals, our almshouses with paupers, and our asylums with the imbecile and insane.” Yeesh.
• One physician-eugenist Dr. L. Pierce Clark linked the use of tobacco to inheritable degeneracy and that the use of the “chronic poison” could be passed down to offspring and produce children that were bad for society. Nevermind that a huge number of actors, politicians, judges, merchants, bankers, scientists, and athletes smoked, since there was a big population of poor smokers, it proved his point. He even went on to say that “high stand men’ at Yale do not smoke” after a survey of nonsmoker Yale students found them to be 20% taller, 23% heavier, and have 66% more lung capacity (okay that last one might make sense). But surveys designed to show the harms against smoking were lax at best and fraudulent at worst: a survey at Columbia was quashed when it showed the highest performing athletes smoked and the majority of studies were conducted to show the results that anti-smokers wanted: Smoking is bad.
• One of the biggest areas of concern with health and smoking was women. Famed New York physician Dr. Samuel Lambert said, “Intemperate smoking causes nervousness and may lead to something worse. . . . Women who use cigarettes cannot be temperate. At best it is a horrible weed and should be let alone. It fouls the breath and makes women unwomanly.” Before women’s suffrage, the cigarette was a symbol of un-femininity (although that would change due to tobacco companies targeting suffragettes, read part 1!). The cigarette became the symbol of a degenerate middle-class woman who smoked rather than being mothers. One physician remarked in a medical paper that “No more pitiful sight on earth could possibly be imagined than the spectacle of some mother who is a cigarette smoker bringing into the world a poor, pitiful physically and mentally defective child.” Meaning that he was glad that women who smoked could not reproduce.
  • By the 1930s the eugenic experiments were centered on fertility and lactation. A group of researchers said that nicotine inhibited lactation which resulted in many hospitals banning smoking after labor (you could still smoke up to and sometimes during delivery). Regardless, the studies did little to control for confounders, or other potential causes of the results they received. Anxious women produce less milk and many anxious women also smoke. Clearer heads did try to dispel the overwhelming focus on tobacco bashing and try to explain more scientific means of results but often they were suppressed.

​
With the success of Lucky Strike’s ‘20,679 doctors’ campaign, other industries followed suit. Here the California Prune and Apricot Growers Association’s Sunsweet Prunes is similarly advertised.

So Close to Understanding

• Despite the anathema the anti-cigarette crowd displayed, their experiments and surveys just pushed cigarettes into the hands of consumers even more. When the popularity of cigarettes rose in the 1920s, people looked to the anti-cigarette crowd to prove their results—”show that there is harm.” Since cigarettes didn’t develop quick pathologies like contaminated booze during Prohibition or quack medicines that contained mercury, the lack of results convinced people that cigarettes must be safe. By 1935 the theory that cigarettes caused disease didn’t progress past being a theory—people could smoke their entire life and not have any diseases.

​
https://preview.redd.it/rrf3txil2xp91.png?width=558&format=png&auto=webp&s=618ddb7f9d499041d06344d150127a90c484f685

• One big historical perspective to remember is that for the people of the 1900s-40s, you were much more likely to die of a major infection than some cancer that takes decades to develop from a delicious commodity. When children had a 14% chance of dying by one years old (if they make it through pregnancy and delivery), people were focused on different things. I mean, the first 50 years of the 20th century we have some of the most important drugs ever discovered: Aspirin for heart failure (1897), Steroids to prevent inflammation following surgery (1930s), Penicillin (1928), Insulin (1922), and many more. People were just living longer—the life expectancy in 1910 for men was 48 years while in 1970 it was 70 years (now it's 79). Let’s say you were 25 years old in 1910, then you’d only have another 20 years of life to see the effects of the cigarette. If you were born in 1910 and smoked from the age of 25 onwards, you have over 6 decades more to see the effect of cigarette-induced cancers.
  • One of the big developments of the study of disease in populations came about in the 1920s. Previously only patients with cancer would be selected to be studied but the notion of recruiting people prospectively (ahead of time) and pairing them with someone with similar demographics allowed them to track cancer cases vs cancer-free controls. It was the words of Herbert Lombard and Carl Doering in 1928 that proved that cancer is not contagious nor associated with poor housing or constipation (yeah not sure why that was the thinking of the time). They did find that heavy smokers had a 27% increase in overall cancer rates but they said that it is likely that cigarettes and cancers had a link but then they minimized their result due to limitations of their study.
  • One industry to jump on the back of cigarettes=cancer was the life insurance industry. As people lived longer it meant that they were able to pay more into the system and thus generate more revenue—it's the business of life insurance companies to not have people die or require care. In fact it was insurance companies that led the charge in statistically studying the link between cigarettes and cancer. One team of Louis Dublin (statistician at Metropolitan Life Insurance Company), Edgar Sydenstricker (US Public Health Service), and Frederick Hoffman (statistician at Prudential) devoted their careers to establishing a statistical link. They found that the rate of lung cancer grew steadily as cigarettes became more popular (1915 = 0.7%, 1930 = 1.9%). Some opponents pointed to the fact that diagnosis tools had improved significantly during those years and Hoffman wasn’t willing to preach staying away from cigarettes.

​
https://preview.redd.it/bvcavprn2xp91.png?width=605&format=png&auto=webp&s=ca998380b42cd8fbc2580bc7bcb2b5f33349c887

• In 1933 Dr. Evarts Graham performed the first successful pneumonectomy, the total removal of a cancerous lung, and allowed treatment of lung cancer to jump leaps and bounds. The pneumonectomy became the treatment of choice for lung cancer which was known to be 100% fatal. Graham was known to smoke heavily and despite working with smokers and lung cancer, was a big opponent to the theories that smoking caused harm—after all, he smoked a ton and no harm came to him. His biggest skepticism was the fact that smoke entered both lungs but only one became cancerous, why? Despite his vehement beliefs, he agreed to study lung cancer in smokers with Ernst Wynder, a third year medical student from Washington University, in order to put these theories to bed.
  • Taking after Englishman John Snow who discovered the cause of Cholera, Wynder is described as a “shoe-leather epidemiologist” as he would travel extensively by foot to collect data from lung cancer patients. Unlike previous investigators, Wynder and Graham used new statistical techniques to throw out arbitrary categories like moderate or heavy smoker to 5 more concrete categories. They found that lung cancers from non-smokers were rare and Wynder wondered if carcinogens (chemicals that caused cancer) came from gasoline fumes or insecticides in those cases. Likewise they found that cigarettes were much more common, and used more heavily than pipes or cigars.
  • Their paper was published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) on May 27, 1950. Wynder and Graham reported that lung cancer could occur in smoker or non-smoker groups and that heavy smoking didn’t automatically mean lung cancer. They said that smoking was one of many causes of lung cancers but smoking a lot for a long time was a big risk factor in developing lung cancers. They offered four reasonings for this assumption: 1) it was unusual to find lung cancer in non-smokers; 2) with lung cancer patients, smoking tobacco was incredibly high; 3) the distribution of lung cancer males to females matched the smoking rate of the genders; 4) the massive sale of cigarettes matched the increased rate of lung cancer.

​
https://preview.redd.it/so5ohi0p2xp91.png?width=817&format=png&auto=webp&s=35798997c4e49305719e579bf517c0588c0c7779

• While Wynder was traveling across the United States shouting about his discoveries, Britain was conducting their own study that would confirm the results that Wynder and Graham found. Two statisticians, A. Bradford Hill and Richard Doll, began their experiment in 1947 to study the rising increase in lung cancer which had dramatically ticked up following WW1. With his economics background Hill used the new tools generated by British statistician and geneticist R. Fischer (for those of you in statistics, he’s the Fischer test) and Hill had conducted the first randomized, double blind clinical trial to study the effectiveness of streptomycin in the treatment of tuberculosis. Doll’s career also began with tuberculosis and it was his surveys that alerted Hill to another genius in the epidemiology field. Together they would tackle lung cancer.
  • Hill and Doll began their investigation dubious of the idea that cigarettes cause lung cancer (like Graham) and they believed cigarettes to be just one factor in a much larger issue. Doll believed that the now widespread use of cars following WW2 was a more likely factor than cigarettes. They found that of the 647 patients in their study, all of them smoked cigarettes and when the p value was calculated they found it was a one in a million chance the results were due to chance. Their paper explaining their results would be published in the British Medical Journal in September of 1950, just four months after Wynder and Graham in JAMA.
  • With Wynder and Graham’s article and Hill and Doll’s finding 1) significant, 2) similar, 3) independent results, the medical community soon became convinced of the merits of the discovery. By this time in 1950, many clinicians were seeing the effects of the decades of cigarette smoking in their patients and the data was convincing. Carl Weller, the chair of the pathology department at University of Michigan, analyzed and summarized all the major findings regarding smoking and cancer. Like the others, Weller was suspicious of the results and believed that cancer rates were a pretty constant factor and these results proved otherwise false.
    • One study he trampled upon was Percivall Pott’s study linking cancer to chimney sweeps in 1775. He found that the young boys (4-10 years old) who cleaned out chimneys had an abnormally high rate of scrotum cancer compared with non-sweepers. It was his work studying rates of disease and using animal models (painting tar coal on bull/pig testicles) that showed soot to be a major cause of cancer. Pott had proven that Benzo A Pyrene causes cancer, the world's first discovered carcinogen. It was his work that helped pass the Chimney Sweepers Act of 1788 which was a big factor in stopping child labor. Immediately Weller urged action after re-discovering Pott’s work—if soot had these chemicals, what’s to say that any kind of smoke wouldn’t? By 1955 the majority of the medical community was pushing back against cigarettes and was trying to warn the public about the dangers of smoking. A study among doctors showed that about 52% of doctors smoked in 1952 and at least 30% smoked a pack of cigarettes a day. By 1959, only 39% smoked with 18% smoking a pack or more per day.
• Despite giving up smoking in 1950 when he published his research, Graham contracted bilateral lung cancer in 1957 and would die quickly. As Brandt says, “In the end, he became yet one more data point in the lethal history of smoking.”

​
https://preview.redd.it/q7o1kjsb4xp91.png?width=519&format=png&auto=webp&s=3b71d6fad9db01c6abb3b323a08dc0d646d73942

Tobacco Companies Fight the Data

So what were tobacco companies doing while all of this science was trying to upend their industry and money making? Well, they were selling cigarettes and doing quite well…that is until 1950. Patients would go to their doctor concerned about the reports and ask what was safe to smoke (like drinking less for liver disease) and doctors couldn’t answer what amount of smoking was safe. Another nail in the coffin was the fact that cigarettes were linked to the big C. Cookies. I mean uhh.. Cancer. The scratchy throat and cough of less reputable brands became the harbinger of cooki—cancer to come. So how could the cigarette companies fight against reports that their product caused cancer? If you thought making everyone like the color green was fantastic, this ones a doozy.
​
Evening Star 1950 Newspaper Article about Wynder and Graham’s Article
​
https://preview.redd.it/duun7eer2xp91.png?width=643&format=png&auto=webp&s=b6a710cd71803d4713ad431c4d6cf7492366aa3e

• Although millions of dollars were being made each year, the companies weren’t spending much (or any) money in evaluating the scientific claims coming out at the time. When the reports of the 1950s came out, tobacco companies scrambled to hire their own statisticians to pick apart the reports and find holes in the studies. Likewise they doubled and tripled down in public relations to quell the rising panic in people who had smoked for years (their best customers). Medical reports had never been popular among the general public but with the enormity of the claims and the fact that by 1950, on average a person smoked 2,500 cigarettes per year, the reports eked into daily newspapers. Roy Noor’s article, first being reported in the Christian Herald in October of 1952, was the most effective in spelling the doom into something anyone could understand. No one cared until it hit Reader’s Digest in December with the title “Cancer by the Carton.” After that other major publications made their own reports and by the time the Times picked it up in 1953, the coffin had its third nail.
  • Once these articles were reported, cigarettes weren’t the same. The tobacco industry lost its stranglehold on the public and the pressure was forcing the companies to come forward and speak to the data. To survive the tobacco companies came together to run advertisements and campaigns that exonerated their brands and the consumption of cigarettes. Their first approach was to just deny anything going on:

​
https://preview.redd.it/1xtlou3e4xp91.png?width=511&format=png&auto=webp&s=1603cdd06c1fe47453ea5a9f3045c6485eb68b99
​
https://preview.redd.it/40bhlq3l4xp91.png?width=748&format=png&auto=webp&s=6723fbad5b76a7930153dff3e85db1303f5b9e25

• Chesterfields used entertainer Arthur Godfrey to assuage fears and even said on his weekly show that “I smoke two or three packs of these things every day. I feel pretty good. I don’t know, I never did believe they did any harm, and now, we’ve got the proof.” The proof he meant was from Chesterfield’s company, Liggett & Myers, who produced research saying: This doctor and specialist and some of his assistants, have been conducting experiments for 8 months, and they—people had been smoking Chesterfields for 10 years, some of ’em, and they smoked Chesterfields and nothing but Chesterfields for the last 8 months—it’s a little more than that now, and they have discovered that to date, he can’t find any adverse effects in the nose, the sinus, the ears or throat, or wherever else you smoke ’em.”
• R. J. Reynolds had smokers perform a 30-day Camel’s test for mildness and ran ads in medical journals showing doctors and smokers “reporting” on the mildness of Camels. Their ad (seen above) showed that there was scientific evidence that Camels didn’t even produce throat irritation according to “noted throat specialists.” They used the 30-day test with non-doctors too and many people wrote in to say that Camels were mild and fun! Oh by the way, Arthur Godfrey died of emphysema in 1983 following the removal of his cancerous lower lung in 1959. (Oh his granddaughter Mary Schmidt Amon is on Real Housewives of Washington DC).

​
John Wiley Hill

• The second front was started by American Tobacco’s President Paul Hahn who wanted to stop the “loose talk” reporting on these scientific studies. Famously he reported that no one had conclusively proven that cigarettes cause lung cancer, and he wasn’t wrong; with so many factors and toxins that people inhale over their life, there was no way to say, yes, tobacco did this. That being said there was no evidence to prove Hahn’s opinion either but Hahn had already formulated the plan: take the fight to the idea of proof. His master stroke was to not fight this problem as a single company but to get all the companies together to save themselves. On December 14th, 1953 in NYC Hahn and the CEOs of the other major cigarette companies met at the Plaza Hotel to hash out a new scheme to fight the scientific findings.
  • The CEOs brought in John W. Hill, PR guru from Hill & Knowlton, the most influential PR firm in the US. His firm had worked with the chemical and alcohol industries to get them out of hot water when medical reports had come out. Although Hill had quit smoking in the early 1940s he would vehemently defend his clients from the media and medical community. Hill knew that there were two things he had to do to boost public sentiment: advertising alone could not regain confidence and tobacco companies must dominate the science. In this regard Hill formed the idea that there were two sides to the issue—those who believed that cigarettes caused harm and those who didn't. He highlighted the hysteria and showed the calmness of the tobacco companies which spoke to consumers: who will you listen to? The crazy scientists spilling doom or the people who help you relax?
    • To accomplish this the PR reps for the companies compiled the White Paper: a list of statements by physicians and scientists who questioned the data. Next they would establish an industry-sponsored research entity who would conduct their own research to show different results than what was being reported (nevermind where the funding was coming from). As such, the Tobacco Industry Research Committee was formed and would start creating research that benefitted the cigarette industry. Despite explicit warnings that this would breach the Sherman-Antitrust Act, the companies went ahead and spent a lot of time trying to make it look as third party as possible.

​
[Right] Clarence Cook Little

• The last action of 1953 was to issue a comprehensive statement to smokers. In the now infamous January 4th, 1954 “A Frank Statement to Cigarette Smokers” (read here) it established that the tobacco industry totally cared about the wellbeing of smokers. Of course our products don’t harm you and we will always cooperate to make sure nothing harms you. Love you, kisses. Unsurprisingly the Frank Statement worked wonders. Many skeptical smokers felt relieved despite more and more scientific publications claiming the harm of tobacco. The Frank Statement represented a paternalistic care of loving companies watching out for the consumer and made the industry authoritative in deciding what was true. And mind you this was only 3 weeks after the Plaza Hotel meeting happened—in less than a month Hill & Knowlton had turned the tides on anti-cigarette sentiment.
  • Some were hopeful about the TIRC’s claim to supporting tobacco research, including Wynder. Quickly it became obvious that the TIRC was a PR front rather than a serious scientific entity which was clear by the executive director, W. T. Hoyt, not having any scientific background. Before joining Hill & Knowlton, he sold newspapers… Hoyt would remain at the TIRC until he retired in 1984. Other clear signs were the fact that American Tobacco President Paul Hahn and Phlip Morris’ President Parker McComas acted as chairs for the board.
  • But who would serve as scientific director? After searching for notable scientists who were extreme skeptics, the search committee turned up nothing. Eventually seven scientists accepted positions on the Scientific Advisory Board and Clarence Cook Little was elected to serve as chair. Little was the perfect spokesman: he doubted the link between cigarettes and cancer, he was charming and gregarious, and an experienced public speaker. Little was… interesting. When he served as president of the American Birth Control League in 1936, he supported the efforts of “the gentlemen who rule Italy, Japan, and Germany for demonstrating that a program of stimulating population is a program of war. Our political and sociological premise in America is based on the false premise that all persons are born free and equal. This is an absolute absurdity, we must segregate men according to their standing.” Yikes.
• As bad as it sounds, Little wasn’t the only one who had those opinions during the day and in fact it wasn’t that uncommon. He believed that cancer was inherently linked to one’s genes and if smoking caused cancer it was due to that person’s terrible genes. As much as I would like to say he was ignorant, Little was Harvard educated in genetics and became Harvard faculty soon after graduating. He later became the youngest president of a college when he picked up the role at University of Maine in 1922 at the age of 23! Three years later he became president of the University of Michigan. In 1929 he left to become the managing director of the American Society for the Control of Cancer and his work there would help establish a national cancer policy. US Surgeon General Thomas Parran named him to the National Advisory Cancer Council when Congress established the National Cancer Institute in 1937. In 1950 he received the American Cancer Society's annual award for “distinguished service in cancer control” and a colleague of Wynder and Graham, Dr. Alton Ochsner, presented him with the award. So, he should’ve known better.
  • When he was appointed, many praised the TIRC for picking such a notable scientist but quickly it became obvious the role he was serving. Little constantly recentered the public’s attention on the two-sides debate and that more research needed to be done before anyone could say cigarettes definitively caused cancer. Little’s earlier work centered on animal models and he became the leading voice in dismissing animal lung cancer models. Graham sent a letter to Hill in 1956 saying, “You may be surprised to know that Dr. C. C. Little was willing to become the chairman of that Committee. It seems astonishing to me that a man of his eminence in the field of cancer and genetics would condescend to take a position like that.” Ochsner came out and said that the TIRC was “a tapeworm research into the physical and chemical composition of tobacco.”

Kicking the Issue to the Next Decade

​
https://preview.redd.it/p7848inw2xp91.png?width=489&format=png&auto=webp&s=2634e3ecef569c8c16f9c51739efb14c58d2bfd0
Now that the tobacco companies were united under the TIRC, they were able to prevent the death of the cigarette in the 50s. The idea that cigarettes caused harm became so muddled in the public eye that most people couldn’t make headway with it and so just continued their old habits: smoking. And skepticism abounded in the debate—hell, the most prominent scientists who believed in the harms of cigarettes started out as skeptics: Evarts Graham, A. Bradford Hill, Richard Doll, etc. But those with knowledge of science could be convinced, but those without it? Well that’s where PR came in.
​
https://preview.redd.it/tot6qljx2xp91.png?width=439&format=png&auto=webp&s=eff2ac2e956355f74ddfd85bac47968b17d269be

• Pressured by his scientific colleague at the Scientific Advisory Board, Cook Little left as chair of SAB due to being more PR focused than scientific. Hill & Knowlton called on the SAB and Little to continue to make statements in the media, and with pressure from tobacco executives to say that tobacco posed no harm, Hill pushed that stress onto the TIRC. The strategy relied on intimate contact between the TIRC and authors, editors, scientists, and “opinion makers” that could help shape the PR image Hill & Knowlton wanted to produce. They urged newspapers to have “balance and fairness” when reporting about tobacco news and make sure there was equal wordage of both sides. The July 1954 issue of True Magazine featured the article “Smoke Without Fear” that was reprinted to over 350,000 journalists. The use of celebrities to cast doubt on the role of cigarettes with cancer also helped supplant the doubt in the data. Magazine magnates like Henry Luce (founder of Life, Time, Fortune, and Sports Illustrated) and TV broadcaster Edward Murrow both supported the tobacco industry. Together with other media personalities, the ambiguous conclusion was made and would stay. Oh, by the way, Edward Murrow would die of lung cancer in 1965, just ten years after his two part documentary supporting cigarettes.
  • Finally recovering from the whacks the medical community gave it in the early 1950s, by 1958 the tobacco companies focused their attention on getting doctors back on their side. The TIRC distributed the magazine Tobacco and Health for free to doctors and dentists in which it asserted that cancer was a complex issue and difficult to understand. With over 500,000 readers, Tobacco and Health was instrumental in sowing doubt among doctors who watched their patients die of lung cancer. In an internal memo in 1962, it states:

“[I]t goes to all doctors and dentists in the country and, believe me, not all of them like to get it. However, we know that a good many of them pay attention to it or else we wouldn’t have so many complaining letters— as well as the more receptive kind. We have concluded that even if TOBACCO AND HEALTH aggravates a doctor, its very presence reminds him that there are other aspects to the lung cancer problem and the smoking and health question. . . . We don’t try to kid ourselves that all doctors are aware of the publication or that many of them even open it or see it. However, the checks that we have made, both by personal interview and post card surveys, indicate that it does get attention to a rather surprising degree.”

• Tobacco and Health was also sent to politicians and journalists to purport that there was just not enough research! Gosh! By taking this position the tobacco companies were walking a fine line: they weren’t flat out denying the problem, in fact they wanted more research to be done! It made them the reasonable ones and the public latched onto that idea. After nearly a decade of work, the companies could quietly back off of the whole “doesn’t cause harm” mantra to avoid any civil responsibility.
• All this work paid off: the amount of cigarettes sold per year rose from 369 billion in 1954 to 488 billion in 1961 and the per person number of cigarettes rose from 3,344 in 1954 to 4,025 in 1961. In the eyes of Hill & Knowlton, the tobacco industry had made it past their biggest threat and could not be slowed down. The controversy elevated the tobacco companies when other industries were simply flattened by public sentiment. And so we leave off the story here in the 1960s with the giant that is the tobacco industry still growing. Now combined in a single goal, the tobacco companies could operate more liberall in swaying the public in smoking, regardless of the brand.

​
Siberian Liberation Movement flag
ENGLISH:
We continue the topic of weapons for self-defense, and not only.
It is important to understand that after the war - a bunch of life-wounded, abandoned by everyone and useless crowds of former warriors, will not only flood the streets of cities, but will also commit crimes already in their "homeland", thinking that no one will punish them.
If you give such madmen an armed selection, then you can save other people's lives.
In addition, we remind you that harming the dog regime, no matter what, propagandist, jailer that is ready to put you in jail for many years for an opinion against the war is currently the most effective way to rebel.
Just do not forget about conspiracy and safety in the manufacture.
telegram. ph/EHffektivnye-sredstva-dlya-samooborony-09-14
----------------
RUSSIAN:
Продолжаем тему оружия для самообороны, и не только.
Важно понимать что после войны — куча израненых жизнью, брошенных всеми и никому не нужных толп бывших вояк, не только наводнят улицы городов, но и будут вершить преступления уже у себя на "родине,, думая что их никто не накажет.
Если же дать таким безумцам вооружённый отбор, то вы сможете спасти чужие жизни.
Кроме того, напоминаем нанесение вреда псу режиму, не важно какому, пропагандисту, тюремщеку что готов вас посадить на долгие годы за мнение против войны является на данный момент самым эффективным способом бунта.
Только не забывайте о конспирации и безопасности при изготовлении.
telegra . ph/EHffektivnye-sredstva-dlya-samooborony-09-14
​
ARTICLE:
Effective means for self-defense.
author?September 14, 2017
​
Tools of resistance
The article will focus on what is now: you can buy, for what amount, where exactly, and how to use it. To the question: WHY? Everyone will answer on their own. The article is divided into two parts: In the first part, we will talk about what can be purchased, at what price and where exactly ?; The second part will tell you how to use it all? The article is written under the slogan "Simple, clear and intelligible" and is designed for an ordinary person with a low level of knowledge in the field of weapons and defense. And remember that it all depends on the skill of the person, not the weapon.
All characters and events, despite the obvious connection with reality, are completely fictional. The article is replete with rude expressions and, by virtue of its content, is generally not intended for viewing by anyone.
Part #1
The first thing I want to say is that the weapon from the owner requires maximum responsibility and SKILLS. Otherwise, it will be used against you or it will be useless. And rule number 1 that must always be observed is safety when handling weapons. Each type of weapon has its own, for example, you can't shoot at an enemy from a shotgun if your favorite woman is standing next to him, because he and she will be fucked up because of the large radius of destruction. And from a large caliber, for example 12 or 338, you will not shoot at the enemy if he holds hostage a person who is dear to you, as he will flash through them both. Lots of options. So before you pick up a weapon, get into your head the rules for its use.
The photo shows a complete set for effective "self-defense" in almost any conditions and in any situation. This set contains "tools" that fully meet the "Price - Quality" requirement in the territory of the Russian Federation.
PS. I was too lazy to peel off the badges, there will be ugly holes in the board. They have nothing to do with the topic.
And so let's go!
1) Vepr 12 (Hammer) - the photo shows model 205-00 with a barrel length of 430 mm and a total length of 977 mm with the butt unfolded. The most common and popular model among the entire model range of Vepr 12 gauge. This is due to the ideal barrel length. The fact is that in the models:
205 - 01 (L520) barrel length 520 mm (the model has a fixed DTK (Muzzle Brake Compensator), the ability to fire with a folded butt);
205 - 01 (L570) barrel length 570mm (possibility of firing with a folded butt);
205 - 02 barrel length 680 mm (the possibility of firing with a folded butt);
205 - 03 barrel length 305 mm (locking mechanism that does not allow firing with the stock folded);
205 - 04 barrel length 483 mm (the model has a wooden clumsy stock)
As you can see, all other models are too long, which negatively affects the mobility of this device. The Model 205-03 is the perfect, short, semi-automatic combat carbine, provided you use powerful ammo. If you use low-powered ammunition, then the carbine's automatics will not work, the cartridge case will not be ejected and the next cartridge will not be sent. As you might guess, this is very bad, since you need maximum reliability at the “X” moment. The boar is assembled on the basis of the RPK (Kalashnikov Light Machine Gun), which allows it to easily take on the reliability and durability of the "Saiga" made on the basis of the AK. I will not focus on the advantages of this device among its competitors for a long time, since it breaks everyone into pieces. Read reviews, watch videos, etc. The only "minus" is its weight from 4.3 kg. I can answer this what if you are a feeble squishy who is not able to hold a weapon of this weight, then maybe you don't need it at all? Think about it.
As for the price, it is 40,890 rubles on the official website of JSC VPMZ Molot. In big cities, the price tag is from 45-50k (they wind it up). Do not forget about the cost of cartridges, weapons in Russia are expensive. For such money, there is nothing better in the WORLD that would correspond to the similar characteristics of this weapon. And the fulfillment by him of a certain kind of goals, but about them in part no. 2. Tip - buy a Vepr in the secondary market with a small shot, it will cost you much cheaper and with extras. A lot of people think that they will buy weapons and be happy, but this is an illusion. And then this happiness lies idle for 5 years, hung to the fullest with all sorts of tuning.
ATTENTION! Weapons are purchased under license! There are many articles on the clearnet about how to acquire it.
2) Grand Power T-12. I have said a lot about this type of pistol, read the article “Increasing the power of traumatic weapons” and comments. I will only note the important points: 1) The pistol must be made in: Slovakia, AKBS, Fortuna, 2015. The remaining models are not suitable for use and do not stand up to criticism; 2) The cartridges must be powerful: pre-reform or UKN (read the article “Increasing the power of traumatic weapons”);
Production models: Slovakia, AKBS, Fortuna 2015 are no longer produced and are not sold in stores. You can buy them on the secondary market with hands. The fact is that the production of AKBS was discontinued in 2013, 5 years will soon pass and the owners of the T-12 AKBS will have to renew their licenses, which very few people do. Mostly they sell a pistol with a shot of 10-100 shots (this is negligible, there are owners with a shot of more than 5000+), or even without a shot at all, it has been in a safe for 5 years. I mean, there will be a lot of ads in the secondary market. The price for this pistol will be in the region of 40-80k rubles, depending on the condition and kit. When buying, I advise you to take a knowledgeable person with you to inspect the weapon, not a talker who has never had this barrel, but a person who understands the issue. If you are not well versed in
ATTENTION! Weapons are purchased under license!
3) Ontario Rat 1 - in the common people "Rat". I will say right away that idiots carry a knife for self-defense, well ... nothing personal. More details in part number 2. This knife is one of the most popular in the world, positioned in America as a folding survival knife. But this is complete bullshit, I would look at an American with this knife when he needs to make a dwelling or a raft. Immediately all the fasteners will loosen and he will scratch with the blade, cutting his hands like a baboon. This knife model is better to buy a Chinese replica, oddly enough, but the replica is better than the original, which costs 7-10 times more. This is a controversial opinion, but all experts agree that the replica is of very good quality. There are many videos and articles on the clearnet about this knife. The price is 1k rubles on Aliexpress. It is practically not sold in stores, as you can buy it on Aliexpress. If there is somewhere, then at a price 3-5 times more expensive. Mostly original.
4) Black 65ml - or the most evil GB (gas cylinder). In practice, I personally used many GB models (about 5-6 models in total 15-17 times), but more than once I was convinced of the effectiveness of Black. Incapacitates any enemy if used correctly. More details in part number 2. The price for it is only 290-400 rubles, depending on the place of purchase. It is sold in almost all weapons stores without documents and records. Only it is very quickly dismantled, and less effective models remain on the shelves.
5) Lanterna - this small, inexpensive, but powerful flashlight with 2000 lumens and a strong aluminum body will serve you well. It has 3 glow modes, and is able to narrow the beam from wide to narrow. With this baby, you can blind the enemy at a distance of 100-140 meters. It is sold on Aliexpress. Price - 200 rubles.
6) A clamp is an ideal custom substitute when used correctly. It is selected according to the size of your hand, size no. 3 is suitable for a person up to 70kg, no. 4 up to 90kg. If you have a paw like Denis Tsyplenkov, then I think that you don't need brass knuckles and that's fine. Sold in most hardware stores. The price is 50-200 rubles, depending on the model.
Part #2
1) Vepr 12 (Hammer). We all know about the consequences of self-defense in Russia, usually everything ends with sending a self-defender to kitsch, moreover, for 5-8 years. To avoid such situations, it is necessary to comply with TB. You can study TB on Runion, there are enough articles on this topic, I won't say anything new. I will only add that it would be good to use audio and video recording devices if you are clearly sure that you are legally correct. For example, they want to take out a hut / house, and you sleep inside. Or they came to fuck you, but did not expect that you were already prepared for the "guests". The point is to record everything that happens on audio or video, this will be excellent evidence in court. You can even deliberately provoke a person to aggression, so that he would start threatening you, etc., this will not be visible on the audio recording if you use non-verbal. Or use a camera without a microphone, there are many options, show your imagination. Aliexpress is littered with small devices that no one will notice.
Let's assume that you know TB and you have a brand new Vepr. The first thing NOT to do is to make a RIFLE out of a shotgun! The Internet is full of videos of how some kind of “shooter” hangs his Saiga or Vepr (they like to call weapons animals in Russia) with all sorts of x * eta. Putting on a shotgun, which is designed for a maximum distance of 40-50m, optical sights, bipods, etc. If you need a rifle, then wait 5 years and buy it, and don't take shit, you better learn how to shoot and study tactics! The boar shoots immediately and at the target from the box, you don't need to buy anything for it, it's a SHOTGUN! The only thing you can get is a more comfortable handguard, a red dot sight (open type), DTK for more accurate shooting. ALL! Nothing else is needed, and you can do without it. What you really need to buy is a good, comfortable, tactical belt. A boat with a loaded magazine weighs a lot, a well-chosen belt corrects this shortcoming. The ideal option is the “Dolg m3” belt with many wearing options. Valuable - 2000 rubles.
And so, you know TB, you have a good belt and there is no husk. Let's move on to training, yes, yes, you need to train and moreover regularly, I will not give you a “magic pill”. Rule number 1 to use exclusively large magnum buckshot weighing 48 grams. When training, you can use a light shot 32gr, as it is very cheap and well suited for training. But you should definitely do a couple of exercises with magnum buckshot in order to feel the recoil and get used to it. It is desirable to conduct training every week, but if there is no opportunity and finances (this is an expensive business), then once a month. In one training session, you should shoot about 20-50 rounds, if the training is the first in your life, then 100-150, subsequent ones can be less. You should do simple and effective exercises, you don't t tt tt need to tumble and jump like a monkey, in a real situation you will be fucked, if you do tricks like a circus baboon. The distance to the target should be: 5, 10, 15 meters. You can use one target 20 meters, but it will be superfluous. You can use the landfill either paid (if money allows) or free (forest). But remember that according to the law, shooting in the forest without a hunting permit is prohibited. Real firefights in the city take place at a distance of 5-20m maximum, at this distance the most effective weapon is a 12-gauge semi-automatic carbine on the Kalashnikov system. Since such a system allows fast reloading by changing the magazine, the rest of the shotguns take a very long time to reload, especially in a real shootout when the level of adrenaline is high. I want to repeat that you would only use magnum buckshot in a real firefight! You don't have to use bullets, you'll hit where the fuck is on a moving target and the store you have 8-10 rounds. If you are bitten in the head, then you can buy a drum for 25 rounds by ordering from America. Or even shell-shocked, make a groove in the cover of the receiver, put on a machine-gun belt for 12 gauge, put on a backpack with a hundred rounds of ammunition loaded there, and go out into the street to do the Apocalypse . The boat is made from a machine gun, only a barrel for 12 gauge was installed. You can shoot from it in automatic mode, just remove the blocker. And then it will no longer be a shotgun, but a skating rink. The law of the Russian Federation prohibits the use of automatic weapons by citizens. There is also a butt blocker on the carbine so that it would not be possible to shoot with it folded. This is done specifically by the law of the Russian Federation, so that the weapon does not fall under the category of sawn-off shotguns. But this blocker can be easily sharpened and fired with the stock folded. But you don't need it, it's a shotgun recoil can knock out his shoulder. Now imagine that you have folded the butt and aiming for a shot, you are guaranteed a trip to the dentist.
Weapons at home should not be stored in a trash safe, as they say, but in a place where you can quickly grab it and prepare it for firing. If you have a seed with children at home, then think with your head how best to do it. It is necessary to shoot from this type of weapon reflexively without aiming, this is achieved as a result of training. The main thing is to point the barrel towards the enemy, it is very difficult to miss, the radius of destruction is large. In cases where you do not want to kill a person, then prepare an additional magazine equipped with rock salt. From a distance of 15 meters, rock salt will enter the flesh and cause fucking suffering to a person, maybe even kill. Loading a 12-gauge cartridge with salt is very simple, just carefully open the cartridge, pour out the shot, pour in the rock salt, wrap it back and fill it with glue for tightness. You don't even have to use equipment for equipment, if there is, then good. And in general, you can equip these cartridges with anything you like, even with needles, the limitation is your imagination. You can also use Dragon's Breath incendiary ammo if you're a total pervert. But this is more for entertainment, in a shootout there is only buckshot.
Here is a photo of Kruzak from Novosibirsk, I don't know the details, but they definitely shot from 12 gauge buckshot + shot, possibly they used Vepr or Saiga.
2) Grand Power T-12. This is a weapon of daily wear, with an advantage over Boar, using a special case, of course, you can walk, but it is too bulky. This is a joke, don't do this even if you have 50 cm biceps. Save people's psyche. This type of weapon is beyond competition on the Russian market among other analogues, but only with powerful cartridges. Forget about the Lokhov MR 80 13t and Izh-79-9t, well, or cut off the front sight to make it easier for people and their suffering when the gun is pushed into the ass. If you buy a weapon, then it should fulfill its function, and not shoot at the banks in the country and show off in front of the suckers showing them your "Makarych".
The very first thing you should take care of after purchasing a pistol is to buy a good holster and powerful cartridges. About powerful cartridges, I already said in the article “Increasing the power of traumatic weapons”, later I will write a detailed article with a photo on how to properly equip cartridges. As for the holster, it is selected individually, but keep in mind that you will have to carry a pistol every time you go out. It should not lie in a bordachka, a bag, hidden in shorts, etc. It should take you a maximum of 3 seconds to draw a weapon. If you are f*cking through a dark alley in winter, and you have headphones in your ears, a buttoned jacket and a gun in an operational holster, then you will have so much fun and fall after a blow to the head. What' s stopping you from unbuttoning your jacket? pull the headphones out of your ears and walk through the dangerous area with confidence in safety? After that, you can again listen to your music “Mama Ama Crime” and masturbate with your hand in your pocket. I hope everyone understands that I'm joking. A holster can be purchased for concealed carry, and you can use it in the summer, you don't have to walk like a Chock and show everyone the trunk, showing off in front of suckers. The fact is that you will scare the sucker with the fact that you have a weapon. But lohu you will be of little interest. But a competent man who wants to fuck you will not stop before you have a trunk. He will only change tactics, as he will know that you are armed. The fact is that you will scare the sucker with the fact that you have a weapon. But lohu you will be of little interest. But a competent man who wants to fuck you will not stop before you have a trunk. He will only change tactics, as he will know that you are armed. The fact is that you will scare the sucker with the fact that you have a weapon. But lohu you will be of little interest. But a competent man who wants to fuck you will not stop before you have a trunk. He will only change tactics, as he will know that you are armed.
I will give a situation from life connected with a holster: When I bought my first barrel, I wanted to show it to everyone, to show it off, and so on. I was always looking for adventure on my ass and got involved in all fights and conflicts. Since at that time I felt like a “gangster”, I wore a barrel without a holster in my belt. And once in a fight with two guys on a city day, after I put a middle kick in the ribs of one guy, the barrel fell out of my belt and the second person almost managed to pick it up, but I picked it up from the ground first. I think it is not necessary to explain what would happen if I did not have time? Or the case in the hookah bar, when I hung out there with a girl and forgot the barrel under the table, and then, with a burning ass, I drove to pick it up in a car, since there was no holster and my head did not work due to hormones. In general, do not repeat my stupid mistakes, everything seems to be simple and everyone knows everything,
Training with a pistol should be done at the same frequency as with a shotgun. Targets must be located at a distance of: 3m; 5m; 8-10m; We do the most basic and effective exercises. I don't specifically tell you about them, so how best to watch a video or go to a training, information of this kind is better perceived visually. Shoot 10-20 rounds for training, it's pointless to shoot more, just a waste of money, this is not a military weapon for you. The most important thing that you have to work out is the technique of reaching and aiming the pistol upside down - this is the most important thing. Forget that you will be aiming in a real firefight, you will be killed. You must have a well-developed reflex skill of shooting at a vskidku.
It is desirable to have two stores equipped with 15 rounds, it is not necessary to carry the second one in your jeans pocket so that it sticks out and everyone thinks that it is your member. It is enough to put it in a bag or put it in the car if you are sure that everything is calm and there is no possibility of an attack on you. According to statistics, from 15 to 25 or more rounds are spent for a pistol shootout on one side alone. So think for yourself, but with a pistol it is very difficult to hit a target at a distance of more than 10 meters, even if it is combat, it does not matter.
I also advise you to get a steel heel for the store, I'm still waiting to fuck someone with her, but there was no chance, usually everything is decided physically. There was a case that he put the barrel in his mouth, tearing his opponent's gums, but this is nothing more than youthful stupidity, everyone needs to assert himself that he is the most f*cking and cool.
3) Ontario rat 1. As I said earlier, “self-defense knives are used by idiots” and this is true, I will explain why. The fact is that a knife is a very good tool for killing a person, if of course you know how to use it. For self-defense, it is not suitable at all. Tales about cuts on the face, arms, legs, let them tell the knife fighting trainer, chopping bablishko on the horses (I looked here who attends such events, a bunch of nerds who have never been in real fights). I will explain from my personal experience about the cuts of the limbs. My entire left hand is cut (fawn, but I'm a law-abiding citizen, I translate grandmothers across the road, I love Putin, I listen to Kobzon, I go to work, I don't need to be punched), and not at once. The skin with meat from two fingers was completely cut off, the cartilage was touched, the blood was f*cking in all directions, but I did not feel any pain because of the adrenaline and calmly continued the fight. The knife I carry is purely for its practical use. Plus, when folded, it can be used as a "Yawara" (bottom stick), which I have done repeatedly and always effectively. A good blow to the collarbone with a folded knife clenched in hand will siege any bull without consequences and noise, for example in a shopping center where you can not attract attention. Don't break the main thing, technique comes with experience. I'm not talking about the facial bones and the temporal region. This is really effective, but there is no point in cutting a person, he still won't feel it at the time of the fight (I don't take suckers as an example). But a shock blow with a solid object is much more effective. With a knife it makes sense to inflict only stabbing blows, but be prepared, that after a couple of blows a person will “move horses” from blood loss. Personally, I didn't inflict stabbing wounds, but my sidekick, the chocks, drove a knife 12.5 cm into the write-off, he only felt the blow and immediately turned off. I woke up in the hospital. Thank the Spaghetti God and Satan that he survived.
In general, if you are a schoolboy who has seen enough loshki on YouTube and drives a "company", or just an idiot, then it is better to use not a knife for self-defense, but a GB, which will be discussed below .
4) Black 65 ml. In my subjective opinion, and my opinion will be shared by many knowledgeable people, this is the BEST means of self-defense in Russia.
I had many applications of GB (15-17 times), I used it mainly for testing, I wanted to determine an effective manufacturer. Just don't think that I walked around the city and pinched the homeless with drunks by flooding them with a balloon, no, the opponents were more than worthy. I note that those idiots who think that "using a balloon is not a boy" will be wildly kicked out by those for whom these are empty words. And this rule applies to all types of weapons and means of influence. So save money for doctors or funerals if that's the kind of shit that's on your mind. To make it easier for the family to cope with the financial component of the consequences. I will not focus on the gas cylinder for a long time and load you with unnecessary information in their classification and performance characteristics. Let me just say that Black has an aerosol-jet spray type, which is the most effective. Good content - CS, police irritant in other countries (synthetic substance) Tcs: 0.38% of which: tears, snot, drool, nothing to breathe, loss of space. I - OC oleoresin capsicum 95% (natural hot pepper extract) Tc: 1.0% of which burns the skin and bakes. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. snot, drool, nothing to breathe, loss of space. I - OC oleoresin capsicum 95% (natural hot pepper extract) Tc: 1.0% of which burns the skin and bakes. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. snot, drool, nothing to breathe, loss of space. I - OC oleoresin capsicum 95% (natural hot pepper extract) Tc: 1.0% of which burns the skin and bakes. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin. I tested it on my own skin. I note that Black leaves burns on the skin that may not go away for more than a month. I tested it on my own skin.
Balloon technique. The should be in the pocket with the button down, so that when it is taken in the hand, it is immediately ready for use. Plus, it removes the accidental pressing of the button at the time of taking. Personally, I have had this many times, but mostly when I sit down, in jeans, it can accidentally work. And the pleasant smell of caustic glue with the bewitching aroma of tear gas will make you truly admire the huge burn on your leg and snot, tears, sore throat, and difficulty breathing. So think before, not after. This rule applies everywhere. The balloon should be black and it is advisable to paint the button black with a marker and tear off the wrapper. This is done so that the color does not catch the eye of the opponent and he does not see your balloon. The successful use of the balloon is associated with surprise. If there is a prepared guy with a good reaction, then when he sees the red button, he will be able to quickly dodge. But I hasten to please you, for Black this is not particularly important, they can be poured into the back of the head and into the chest, the main thing is that a person gets into the jet. If you hit in the face, then generally great. The distance should be 1 meter, you don't need to fill it too close, it will ricochet on you. I had this many times. You need to fill in by holding the button with your finger, and direct the jet at the opponent. It will immediately begin to close, fill in the arms, head, shoulders, but your target is the face. 1 long fill in 3 seconds is enough, then the cylinder will stop filling automatically after 3 seconds. You can hold down the button again, but I never did it, 1 time was always enough. After pouring, move away from the opponent for 5-10 seconds, let the composition work well. Black's advantage is that it acts immediately without delay. Then decide for yourself, you can break an easy victim, look at the situation. Also, the balloon can be used as a Yawara by hitting the bridge of the nose with the edge of the bottom, this is very effective.
As for effectiveness, I will say to myself that even with my experience behind me, training, weapons and skills, against the successful use of a balloon against me, there is little I can do, unless of course the enemy is worthy. You should not allow such a situation that someone flooded you, you must prevent this before, otherwise you will have very serious problems. A well-drenched adult, healthy man turns into a helpless child.
5) Lanterna is a good practical flashlight. I will say right away that I don't carry it with me, I take it only in certain situations when I know that it will come in handy for me. I won't talk about its practical properties in everyday life, you yourself know everything very well. Let's talk about tactical. They can perfectly blind the enemy, for example, driving at high speed in a car (you can provoke it on purpose). For self-defense purposes, it is well suited for coupling with a pistol, a flashlight in the left hand, and the right barrel. We narrow the beam of the flashlight, set it to a flashing mode and point it towards the enemy's face. Blinds perfect! This method is used in the FSB and other special services. The enemy will not be able to aim effectively. This is good to use if you need to "clear" the room, and the enemy is hiding somewhere and waiting for you. But these are very rare situations that may never happen.
6) Clamp - the same as brass knuckles. But only she: 1) Cheap; 2) legal; 3) You can immediately throw it off because it's cheap, but for the brass knuckles “I gave you as many as three thousand!” I'll take him home! ”, And then, you know what happens later ... I never used it, I always chopped with my fist - that was enough. But if there are several well-trained, athletic men, then she will perfectly be able to equalize the chances in a fight. The main rule is to paint it black, usually they are red, which immediately catches the eye and excludes an unexpected blow. And as you know, the first blow is the most effective. I have 90% of physical fights on the street, ended with the first clear, sharp blow to the beard. But this is me, I have been involved in sports all my life since childhood. So if you are not confident in your abilities, then even the odds with an effective weapon.

AJ Dental Clinic in Madurai provides the optimal dental implant service with a guarantee. Are you looking for affordable or cheap dental implant service of the best quality? You will be astonished by the dental price difference between our cheap dental implant service and the others in your country. We ensure by far the best dental implant value you can find. Dental implants are the most natural replacement for missing teeth and dental implant surgery is a state of the art technology in dentistry. If you are going to have cheap dental implants, you have come to the right place as we offer a completely cheap dental implant service.
​
Tooth Implant Cost in Madurai
What exactly does cheap, quality DENTAL IMPLANT treatment mean? Is it just a marketing slogan, or is there real content behind this fancy name? Must quality DENTAL IMPLANT treatment cost you a mint? All of these questions will be answered as you read on.
Do cheap, quality DENTAL IMPLANT treatments really exist? Our answer to that question is: "Yes!" The only thing you need to do in order to find it is to browse the web. I try hard enough you will find the website that will show you the DENTAL IMPLANT centers which offer quality treatments in modern clinics for an affordable price. These centers offer various treatments and although the prices are low, the service quality is first-class.
How can the price of top-quality DENTAL IMPLANT treatments be below, or at least reasonable? We can explain that as well! These DENTAL IMPLANT treatment providers have voluntarily lowered their prices. Why would they want to work for less profit? Now that is the heart of the matter.
If a DENTAL IMPLANT surgeon offers the treatment for a cheaper price, he has the chance of enlisting more potential patients. The patients will return if the quality of the service was satisfying; in this way, the DENTAL IMPLANT surgeon can build long-term relationships with patients. AJ Dental Clinic would like to have returning patients; that is the reason why we offer treatments for very reasonable prices. Please take a look at our dental implant price list by following this link.
Cheap Dental Implant Procedure
We would like to share your information about the procedure of dental implant surgery. We feel it is very important to provide you with a complete picture of the procedure. Having all the details it will be easier for you to plan your visit to your dental implant surgeon.
Procedure for Dental Implants
The procedure for dental implants has three main stages.
1) Checking and preparing the area of the planned dental implant. We need to know that the root canals at the surgical area are extracted, that there is enough bone in the jaw to fix the dental implant and the gum is not inflammated. If you have root canals they have to be extracted. If the volume of the bone is not sufficient you need bone grafting. If there is an inflammation you need to take antibiotics. The best way to clear all these important questions is by an X-ray or a 3D CT. After checking the images the dentist will have a full detailed dental implant plan for you.
2) Dental implant surgery. Dental implant surgery can be made only when the specific area is healthy and not inflammated. That's really important for minimizing risks and ensuring fast and proper healing after surgery. Dental implant surgery means that the base of the implant will be placed and fixed in the jaw by an implant surgeon. Implant surgery can be made right after the extraction when there is no inflammation. If you require bone grafting you have to wait with the implant surgery about 12-16 weeks until the jaw recover. Usually, we suggest to dental implant patients stay in Madurai for a week after the dental implant surgery, during this time the dental implant will check the condition of the patient regularly, and at the end of the week, the stitches will be taken out. Some patients can't stay for a week; their stitches will be removed by their dentist in their home country.
3) Placing the crowns on the dental implant. Crowns are the upper, visible parts of the implants. They are placed 12-16 weeks after the dental implant surgery. This time is needed for the jaw and gums to "take in" the placed base of the implant. After the jaw recovered satisfactorily the crown can be placed on the dental implant. This surgical intervention is simpler and faster than placing the base of the implant.
#dentalclinicinmadurai
#toothimplantcostinmadurai
#bestdentistinmadurai
#pediatricdentistmadurai
#bestdentaldoctorinmadurai