Plea to Smokers Everywhere!

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: yayo

Originally posted by: Walleye
How Dare you do this to your family, friends, surrounding people. how dare you keep such a filthy habit that it degrades your health, their health, and all of your financial stability?!?! if you truly love those around you, then you'd stop smoking. Why do this to yourself? if not for you, quit for your family. they love you, and want you to be around longer.



please, rational discussion, no flames.

Go screw urself. How dare you involve yourself with other peoples business.

It is his business and my business and everyone else's business when these moronic empty headed smokers affect my health as well.

It's amazing what people will believe. I bet you have no problem driving in traffic, breathing in the exhaust fumes of thousands of cars each day, yet you catch one whiff of cigarette smoke and start crying about your health.

Not only is car exhaust cleaner to breath than cigarette smoke, it's also non-addicting.

Um, no. addiction is not the issue with ETS, so that's moot. As for "cleaner," you need to get a clue. Car, and especially diesel exhaust is many, many times more carcinogenic than tobacco smoke. And there are proven, valid links between diesel exhaust and cancer.

Fear of ETS is hysteria, nothing more. It's funny to me how people are so afraid something that isn't likely to hurt them, yet wallow in something else every day that is proven harmful.

I don't think so. You will have to show me a report stating that, with conclusive evidence. Car exhaust is mostly Carbon Dioxide, water vapor, and some carbon monoxide, with only small amounts of other nitrogen/carbon/hydrogen emissions. I agree that diesel exhaust is rather toxic when it doesn't completely burn, but it's also not exhausted at face level, and is only commonly used in large trucks (small ratio compared to cars). Cigarettes are burned at low heat, so the result is a much more unrefined mixtures of heated solids and gases. When tar cools it becomes a solid/liquid again and sits in the lungs. Cigarette smoke has a type of stickiness that turns ordinary objects into sponges - clothes or a room will continue to emit smoke residue even weeks after being subjected. Car exhaust simply disperses into the air and returns to the nature cycle.

Here's a clue:

Use this search phrase in google: "diesel exhaust" +carcinogens

Then try it with automobile exhaust.

BOTH types of pollution have been verifiably and irrefutably tied to lung diseases including cancer. It doesn't NEED to be "exhausted at face level."

Hell, the pollution from coal fired power plants has been tied to disease.

You can twist it all you want, but to anyone who lives in a populated area, the daily exposure to diesel exhaust is far more likely to cause cancer than ETS.

Compare this to the fact that the vast majority of studies on the health effects of ETS on non-smokers have found NO connection between exposure to ETS and disease. NONE.

Okay okay calm down. I'm stuck in a perspective where I don't live in big city so my observation is different. I'll see what I can dig up...

Canadian site about 2nd hand smoke

Across Canada, over 3,000 non-smokers die each year from being exposed to second-hand smoke. Over one in ten of these people die from lung cancer. Most of the others die from heart disease and stroke.

<--- (not sure how they determined that)

Another 2nd hand smoke site

In 1986, reports by both the U.S. National Research Council and the U.S. Surgeon General concluded that second-hand smoke causes lung cancer in adult non-smokers, and that children of parents who smoke have an increased frequency of respiratory symptoms and acute lower respiratory tract infections, as well as evidence of reduced lung function.5, 6 These facts were confirmed and strengthened by the 1992 U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) assessment of the health effects of second-hand smoke.

Smog causing premature deaths in Canada
Since the other 2 sites were Canadian, I found a canadian one for car exhaust as a fair comparison. According to Health Canada smog is causing 5,000 premature deaths every year in Canada.

Smoking quiz

9. Second hand tobacco smoke harms pregnant women.
True. As well as affecting the mother, second hand smoke also affects the baby. Pregnant women who smoke are more likely to have smaller, earlier babies. Babies born to women who are exposed to second hand smoke on a regular basis can also suffer effects from the smoke. Small children and babies are especially vulnerable to second hand smoke if either of their parents smoke.

Based on the death toll comparison - smog induced deaths is 1 & 2/3's as much as 2nd hand smoke induced deaths. That's also not including the canadian smoker's death toll of 41,000. That's very interesting to know. I didn't realize smog was creating that such big of a problem. Definitely gives me a shift in perspective. However, I still stand that 2nd hand smoke is also harmful - but apparently not as harmful as vehicle exhaust.

 

[Amused]

Sag, the problem is the vast majority of studies refute the SHS claims, yet the majority of studies on pollution and specifically diesel exhaust DO show a connection.

The SHS claim is based on ONE EPA report that has been proven to be biased because it picked a few flawed studies claiming a connection between ETS and disease from a pool where the vast majority of studies could find no harm.

Meanwhile, your Canadian page on SHS gives no reference to any study. It just throws out a random number of claimeed deaths as fact.

Finally, lookie here:

1. Glantz SA, Parmley WW. Passive smoking and heart disease: Epidemiology, physiology, and biochemistry. Circulation , 1991:83;1-12.

2.Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory health effects of passive smoking: Lung cancer and other disorders. Washington, D.C.: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, 1992.

These are the sources for the claims of SHS harm on your second link.

Guess what? The EPA report has been thrown out as biased, and the study #1 refers to is one of the flawed studies the EPA report refered to.

And it goes round and round...

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Really? Cigarettes are bad for you? Sh!t, I thought they had Vitamin C in them and stuff!

- M4H

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Amused
Sag, the problem is the vast majority of studies refute the SHS claims, yet the majority of studies on pollution and specifically diesel exhaust DO show a connection.

The SHS claim is based on ONE EPA report that has been proven to be biased because it picked a few flawed studies claiming a connection between ETS and disease from a pool where the vast majority of studies could find no harm.

Meanwhile, your Canadian page on SHS gives no reference to any study. It just throws out a random number of claimeed deaths as fact.

Finally, lookie here:

1. Glantz SA, Parmley WW. Passive smoking and heart disease: Epidemiology, physiology, and biochemistry. Circulation , 1991:83;1-12.

2.Environmental Protection Agency. Respiratory health effects of passive smoking: Lung cancer and other disorders. Washington, D.C.: Office of Health and Environmental Assessment, 1992.

These are the sources for the claims of SHS harm on your second link.

Guess what? The EPA report has been thrown out as biased, and the study #1 refers to is one of the flawed studies the EPA report refered to.

And it goes round and round...

Definitely an intriguing situation. I'll have to hold my opinions at this point and dive further into studies before I can reconcile any position on this subject.

One question though, when you're talking about 2nd hand smoke, are you refering to public smoke, i.e., a smoker just happens to be next to you outside - or are you also including smoke that is created within a private place, such as a parent smoking in their house with kids around? I think proximity makes a difference...

 

[skateallday]

hey try minding your own business and let people do what they want. we dont tell you what to do.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: skateallday
hey try minding your own business and let people do what they want. we dont tell you what to do.

you just did

 

[NetGuySC]

I suppouse your relative was a picture of health ...beyond her smoke related probelms.
I am guessing she was at a perfect weight, ate helthy foods her entire life and exercised regularly.

Did you expect her to live forever??

Did you kow that even people whom never smoked also die? It's true, it has been happening for thousands and thousands of years.

Also did you know the 100% of the people who drink Pepsi have either already died or will die?

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
I suppouse your relative was a picture of health ...beyond her smoke related probelms.
I am guessing she was at a perfect weight, ate helthy foods her entire life and exercised regularly.

Did you expect her to live forever??

Did you kow that even people whom never smoked also die? It's true, it has been happening for thousands and thousands of years.

Also did you know the 100% of the people who drink Pepsi will die?

Sorry but I fail to see your point or its relevance.

 

[NetGuySC]

My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: SagaLore


Definitely an intriguing situation. I'll have to hold my opinions at this point and dive further into studies before I can reconcile any position on this subject.

One question though, when you're talking about 2nd hand smoke, are you refering to public smoke, i.e., a smoker just happens to be next to you outside - or are you also including smoke that is created within a private place, such as a parent smoking in their house with kids around? I think proximity makes a difference...

Both situations.

And you would be right, if there were danger, proximity, intensity and frequency would all make a huge difference.

IIRC, among the studies that the EPA picked to complement their biased report, none of them could connect casual, occational exposure. Only exposure among people who lived and/or worked with heavy smokers for years. But still, the vast majority of studies could find no link to disease, even among those who lived/worked with smokers.

You really should see that episode of Penn and Teller's "Bullsh!t." They summed it up in a much more entertaining fashion than I can.

 

[SagaLore]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: SagaLore


Definitely an intriguing situation. I'll have to hold my opinions at this point and dive further into studies before I can reconcile any position on this subject.

One question though, when you're talking about 2nd hand smoke, are you refering to public smoke, i.e., a smoker just happens to be next to you outside - or are you also including smoke that is created within a private place, such as a parent smoking in their house with kids around? I think proximity makes a difference...

Both situations.

And you would be right, if there were danger, proximity, intensity and frequency would all make a huge difference.

IIRC, among the studies that the EPA picked to complement their biased report, none of them could connect casual, occational exposure. Only exposure among people who lived and/or worked with heavy smokers for years. But still, the vast majority of studies could find no link to disease, even among those who lived/worked with smokers.

Probably most cases are a non-disease ailment. Those who live/work with heavy smokers aren't inhaling the smoke directly, but their exposure is still rather high although dilluted with the air first, and still concerns me - especially since I lived with a smoking mother. (perhaps the fact that 2nd hand exposure is limited to seperated intervals with limited durations - plus like in my case I eventually moved out and am now smoke free the rest of my life - is why reports don't show any diseases caused)

You really should see that episode of Penn and Teller's "Bullsh!t." They summed it up in a much more entertaining fashion than I can.

I've heard good things about that show. Who airs it?

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

Your logic is slightly flawed however. By drinking pepsi, im not causing any harm to anyone else.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: SagaLore

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: SagaLore


Definitely an intriguing situation. I'll have to hold my opinions at this point and dive further into studies before I can reconcile any position on this subject.

One question though, when you're talking about 2nd hand smoke, are you refering to public smoke, i.e., a smoker just happens to be next to you outside - or are you also including smoke that is created within a private place, such as a parent smoking in their house with kids around? I think proximity makes a difference...

Both situations.

And you would be right, if there were danger, proximity, intensity and frequency would all make a huge difference.

IIRC, among the studies that the EPA picked to complement their biased report, none of them could connect casual, occational exposure. Only exposure among people who lived and/or worked with heavy smokers for years. But still, the vast majority of studies could find no link to disease, even among those who lived/worked with smokers.

Probably most cases are a non-disease ailment. Those who live/work with heavy smokers aren't inhaling the smoke directly, but their exposure is still rather high although dilluted with the air first, and still concerns me - especially since I lived with a smoking mother. (perhaps the fact that 2nd hand exposure is limited to seperated intervals with limited durations - plus like in my case I eventually moved out and am now smoke free the rest of my life - is why reports don't show any diseases caused)

My four siblings and me grew up with a three + pack a day smoking mother. The oldest one of us is nearly 50 years old now, and none of us have showed any signs of smoking related illness. The only one of us to smoke was me. I quit a few years back.

Anywho, the point is, the vast majority of studies could find no harm in any situation. The studies that did find harm have been shot down, just like the EPA report that relied on them.

You really should see that episode of Penn and Teller's "Bullsh!t." They summed it up in a much more entertaining fashion than I can.

I've heard good things about that show. Who airs it?[/quote]

Showtime. Still not in HD though

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

Your logic is slightly flawed however. By drinking pepsi, im not causing any harm to anyone else.

Nor are you causing harm to someone else by smoking. The EPA report has been debunked, and the "ETS causes disease" BS is as much hype as the breast implant hysteria.

 

[imported_Mike]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

Your logic is slightly flawed however. By drinking pepsi, im not causing any harm to anyone else.

you're sure no one else is affected by your drinking pepsi? think of the bigger picture....

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

Your logic is slightly flawed however. By drinking pepsi, im not causing any harm to anyone else.

Nor are you causing harm to someone else by smoking. The EPA report has been debunked, and the "ETS causes disease" BS is as much hype as the breast implant hysteria.

Mind pointing out this report? I've never heard of this before.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: Amused

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: NetGuySC
My point is that people die smokers and nonsmokers .. it's a fact of life.

I hate seeing these crusades aginst smokers, but these same people crusading also have their own bad habits.

Your logic is slightly flawed however. By drinking pepsi, im not causing any harm to anyone else.

Nor are you causing harm to someone else by smoking. The EPA report has been debunked, and the "ETS causes disease" BS is as much hype as the breast implant hysteria.

Mind pointing out this report? I've never heard of this before.

Why? It's been the basis for every local and state law banning smoking in certain areas, and it's the basis for your claim that smoking is harmful.

If you don't even know where the basis for your claim comes from, why are you insisting it is true?

 

[clarkmo]

Originally posted by: Walleye
How Dare you do this to your family, friends, surrounding people. how dare you keep such a filthy habit that it degrades your health, their health, and all of your financial stability?!?! if you truly love those around you, then you'd stop smoking. Why do this to yourself? if not for you, quit for your family. they love you, and want you to be around longer.



please, rational discussion, no flames.

Rational discussions from an irrational post? Get real.
Kudos to those who've risen above it. Interesting aboves this. (Finally read thread)

 

[GroundZero]

PLEA TO SMOKERS EVERYWHERE!
Let me bum a smoke?

 

[Jugernot]

Originally posted by: rh71

Originally posted by: Jugernot
You won't get any good replies from this group. Most smokers care about no one but themselves and could care less who else they are killing. Of course, there are always a few who try smoke away from nonsmokers, but they are few and far between.

Jugs

I participated in a lengthy thread about this same thing sometime last year. Basically my side was that they were being inconsiderate and 2 or 3 members felt like they could do whatever the hell they wanted because no law was being broken. Well how are you supposed to argue with a mindset so closed off and selfish in the first place? All I was asking for them to do was to smoke AWAY from exits and entrances of buildings where EVERYONE has to walk through.

This one? Yes I remember, it was started by me.