RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much?

RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

caitlyn -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 11:55:35 AM)
I went to Dead Kennedy and Kissinger not long ago, and really enjoyed the second hand smoke. [;)]

juliaoceania -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:14:07 PM)
Here is the Catp Institute's view on global warming. I do not think I would take anything they say very seriously. They are just a conservative think tank that spews right wing bullshit http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cato_Institute Cato on environmental policy The Cato Institute holds regular briefings on global warming with renowned global warming skeptics as panelists. In December 2003, panelists included Patrick Michaels, Robert Balling and John Christy, all of whom disagree with the scientific consensus on the issue of climate change. No known mechanism can stop global warming in the near term. International agreements, such as the Kyoto Protocol to the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, would have no detectable effect on average temperature within any reasonable policy time frame of 50 years or so, even with full compliance.[19] In response to the World Watch Report in May 2003 that linked climate change and severe weather events: "It's false. There is absolutely no evidence that extreme weather events are on the increase. None. The argument that more and more dollar damages accrue is a reflection of the greater amount of wealth we've created." - Jerry Taylor[20] Cato's relationship with the mainstream scientific community has at times been strained. For example, while experts, such as Sarah Darby (Oxford), Jon Samet (John's Hopkins) and Bill Field (University of Iowa) have demonstated that residential radon exposure is a major public health risk, then-Cato adjunct fellow Steven Milloy republished articles by Michael Fumento dismissing this research and mounting personal attacks on the scientists. [1]

starshineowned -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:28:06 PM)
Lol..ofcourse and how convient of a statement huh. Not even going to bother on the smoking anymore as said. However, I also happen to believe that this whole global warming ozone crap is mallarky as well. Once again due to complete and constant total disagreement amongst the scientific community across the globe regarding it. I'm sure though..that if they disagree with you..it's because they are "right wingers". lmao sorry..not gonna fly..next? Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin

sleazy -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:37:23 PM)
I know I used to smoke a lot, but to blame me for global warming too?????? The whole world loves a scapegoat

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:39:02 PM)
Sorry for the multi-post, but I didn't want to overload the thread. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth By the way, if aspirin were introduced today - it too would not be approved. There are a long list of similar products. There may be a long list of similar products, but I checked with a pharmacist friend of mine and very few have the low number of side effects and the high level of dosage toxicity (the amount of a medicine it takes to actually poison someone) that aspirin does. Aspirin actually does something positive...name one thing that is positive about tobacco usage... quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Preference, personal choice to decide to use or not use marketed products or facilities such as apartments, should remain with people. Agreed...until that preference adversely impacts me in my home. The OP speaks of non-smokers being impacted in their own home. Hmmm, they have made the choice NOT to use the product and are still being affected by it. quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver My father worked 35 years in a mine and smoked and has outlived friends of his who were none smokers and he can still walk 5 miles a day at 81 which suggests susceptability to such illnesses is important too. And my grandfather worked in a mine for 15 years and smoked for 20, and died of cancer which was determined to be related to his smoking. Anecdotal "evidence" is simply not evidence. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth But overweight people and eating habits in general can have the exact same caparison. The cost of health treatment for obesity related diseases such as diabetes increases the cost of insurance. Yes, but when I walk into a restaurant, the fact that there are overweight people eating doesn't cause me to get a sore throat or increase my risk of overeating. LOL

meatcleaver -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:42:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver My father worked 35 years in a mine and smoked and has outlived friends of his who were none smokers and he can still walk 5 miles a day at 81 which suggests susceptability to such illnesses is important too. And my grandfather worked in a mine for 15 years and smoked for 20, and died of cancer which was determined to be related to his smoking. Anecdotal "evidence" is simply not evidence. Which seem to suggest that smoking isn't the only factor when it comes to such deseases.

Masternslave07 -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:44:22 PM)
There may be a long list of similar products, but I checked with a pharmacist friend of mine and very few have the low number of side effects and the high level of dosage toxicity (the amount of a medicine it takes to actually poison someone) that aspirin does. Aspirin actually does something positive...name one thing that is positive about tobacco usage... There is one positive thing about smoking. Smokers enjoy it. It makes them feel better. And before you assume otherwise, no I don't smoke.

juliaoceania -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:51:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: starshineowned Lol..ofcourse and how convient of a statement huh. Not even going to bother on the smoking anymore as said. However, I also happen to believe that this whole global warming ozone crap is mallarky as well. Once again due to complete and constant total disagreement amongst the scientific community across the globe regarding it. I'm sure though..that if they disagree with you..it's because they are "right wingers". lmao sorry..not gonna fly..next? Well Wishes starshine Happy slave of Master Delvin I have studied climate science. The only "scientists" that seriously doubt it are those who work for petro/chemical industry... the same institute that gets its money from tobacco also gets its money from the oil industry.. coinkadink?... I think not[:D] Now I can "believe" the moon is made out of cheese, it does not make it so... And BTW, anyone that knowingly smokes around their children and dismisses the personal experience of treating physicians and numerous studies that show how terrible it is for developing lungs and immune systems to be around ETS is just either in deep denial or they just do not give a shit. You know, there is no "law" against smoking in a closed car with your kids in tow, but common sense would tell you that you would not keep your kids in a burning building around that smoke either... it is like DUH! The carbon monoxide alone is just AWFUL for children! You know, some parents just care more than others I guess

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:53:05 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Masternslave07 There is one positive thing about smoking. Smokers enjoy it. It makes them feel better. And before you assume otherwise, no I don't smoke. When I was a smoker, yes it did. As a non-smoker, I realize that the "mental health benefits" of smoking are far outweighed by the fact that I don't get allergy-related sicknesses for two months every winter, that I don't cough when I get up in the morning, that in another 4-5 years my risk for lung/throat cancer will have declined almost to the point as if I didn't smoke... I'm not saying don't smoke....it's your choice. But when that smoking affects me, it is my choice to do something about it, whether that choice is: doing nothing, leaving your presence, making it more difficult for you to smoke in the places I frequent, or making it uncomfortable enough that you decide to leave. I get that choice too....and if enough people agree with me, it becomes law. If enough people agree with you, it doesn't.

KatyLied -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 12:59:19 PM)
quote: Smokers enjoy it. It makes them feel better They need to smoke because they have a physical dependence on nicotine. Lack of nicotine creates physiological symptoms.

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 1:02:55 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KatyLied quote: Smokers enjoy it. It makes them feel better They need to smoke because they have a physical dependence on nicotine. Lack of nicotine creates physiological symptoms. And when I decided to quit, my doctor informed me that nicotine addiction is very similar to heroine addiction...and suggested that I go on the patch. And I'm 4 years clean (of tobacco, never did heroine!) WOO HOO!

QuietlySeeking -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 1:08:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking quote: ORIGINAL: meatcleaver My father worked 35 years in a mine and smoked and has outlived friends of his who were none smokers and he can still walk 5 miles a day at 81 which suggests susceptability to such illnesses is important too. And my grandfather worked in a mine for 15 years and smoked for 20, and died of cancer which was determined to be related to his smoking. Anecdotal "evidence" is simply not evidence. Which seem to suggest that smoking isn't the only factor when it comes to such deseases. Science proves negatives, not positives. Show me the science that says tobacco smoking has little or no ill effect on the human body, preferably in a recognized medical journal.

meatcleaver -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 1:15:58 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: QuietlySeeking Science proves negatives, not positives. Show me the science that says tobacco smoking has little or no ill effect on the human body, preferably in a recognized medical journal. I didn't say anything about tobacco not having negative effects on health. I said with two very different outcomes from two very different tabacco users, that tabacco is not the whole story when it comes to someone's health

swtnsparkling -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 2:47:23 PM)
quote: juliaoceania anyone that knowingly smokes around their children and dismisses the personal experience of treating physicians and numerous studies that show how terrible it is for developing lungs and immune systems to be around ETS is just either in deep denial or they just do not give a shit. quote: The carbon monoxide alone is just AWFUL for children! You know, some parents just care more than others I guess Well HotDamn! so smokers that have kids we dont give a shit about them. we are unfit loosers, the cig is more important than our childs wellbeing. I guess I am a terrible mother because I did allow my child to spend alot of time with her grandparents and great grandparents all of who smoked. You are the be all end all of mothers I guess - no one could care for or love their children as much as you do. Bravo #1 Mom. Oh btw- wasnt it you who mentioned before your son had a problem with weight? now how could that have happend with a mom who is so concerend for their child? Let him eat the wrongs things? over eat? or is their some kind of medical problem? Oh I remember now- it was the public schools fault for serving such unhealthy foods. Play the blame game.. Yes my daugther has been around smokers- second hand smoke. As I said before never had any illness worst than a cold- no allergies- no asthma- and a size 6. Gosh Im such a lousy mother I just dont care about her do I?

NorthernGent -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 2:58:04 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swtnsparkling no one could care for or love their children as much as you do. With all due respect, I think you're attempting to use drama to cloud the discussion. 1) Passive smoking is dangerous. The links have been put up. The British Medical Association have more experience and resource than anyone on this board so that'll do for me. Add to that the countless others and it's pretty damning. 2) Armed with this knowledge, it then becomes a question of are you prepared to harm your kids' health because of your habit? Do me the courtesy of answering this question, if it was proved beyond all doubt that smoking near your children damages their health would you still do it?

NorthernGent -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 3:00:21 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: caitlyn I went to Dead Kennedy and Kissinger not long ago, and really enjoyed the second hand smoke. [;)] Yeah, well you fucking would, wouldn't you [;)] Are your tea making skills up to scratch, by the way?

swtnsparkling -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 3:18:14 PM)
quote: With all due respect, I think you're attempting to use drama to cloud the discussion. Oh really? Well with all due respect I am not trying to cloud a darn thing. I was not the one who stated : quote: You know, some parents just care more than others I guess So did that rile me up some? you bet your ass it did. I not saying smoking isn't bad- I'm not saying smoking is good. But I sure as hell don't apprciate "opinions" "comments" Directly implying I as a mother dont give a shit- in denial or care for my child because I allowed my daughter to spend time her grandparents. She isn't ill in any way shape or form. So my opinion my parents second hand smoke did Not harm her.. as for your question: quote: Do me the courtesy of answering this question, if it was proved beyond all doubt that smoking near your children damages their health would you still do it? Proven beyond ALL doubt-No she wouldnt of been around smoke- since she is an adult now it is her choice. But......... it wasnt been proven beyond ALL doubt then and it hasnt been proven now.

NorthernGent -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 3:32:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: swtnsparkling : quote: Do me the courtesy of answering this question, if it was proved beyond all doubt that smoking near your children damages their health would you still do it? Proven beyond ALL doubt-No she wouldnt of been around smoke- since she is an adult now it is her choice. But......... it wasnt been proven beyond ALL doubt then and it hasnt been proven now. 1) You seem to be saying that you would not have let your children around smokers if it was proven beyond doubt that it damages health. 2) Does this also mean you would not want to see your cousins, friends, other family members health put at risk by smokers if it was proven beyond doubt? If the answers to the above are yes then you are agreeing with 70% of what we have said all along i.e. no one has the right to put peoples' health at risk. 3) The only question remaining to be answered is this: why don't you believe the likes of the British Medical Association who have years of extensive resource and research? What exactly do you know that casts doubt on the findings of such respected bodies?

juliaoceania -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 3:54:17 PM)
I have no doubt that being around cigarettes is damaging to children. It was damaging to me and my siblings. When a pediatrician shared the increased risks to my child from being around second hand smoke I did not dismiss this information. I took my ass outside and smoked... my decision as a parent... and i am damn glad I made it.

juliaoceania -> RE: Smoking Ban - When is it too much? (1/19/2007 3:59:00 PM)
Here is some information from WHO http://www.ash.org/who-ets-rpt.html#toc66 *C. Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS)* There is sufficient evidence to conclude that maternal smoking causes a marked increase in SIDS. Almost 50 studies have examined this relationship and all indicate an increased risk. Since reductions in the prevalence of prone sleeping position, eight studies have examined maternal smoking and SIDS. The pooled unadjusted relative risk from these studies is approximately 5, indicating that infants of mothers who smoke have almost five times the risk of SIDS compared with infants of mothers who do not smoke. Adjustment for potential confounders lowers the risk estimate; however, many studies over-adjust, e.g. by controlling for birth weight, resulting in an inappropriately low estimate of the risk. Pooling the adjusted results still yields a significantly increased risk of SIDS from maternal smoking. With the available data, it is difficult to distinguish the effect of active maternal smoking during pregnancy from that of postnatal ETS exposure of the infant from smoking by the mother. While the mechanism for SIDS is unknown, the predominant effect from maternal smoking is generally attributed to in utero exposure of the foetus. However, clear evidence for an ETS effect arises from six studies examining SIDS and paternal smoking where the mother is a nonsmoker. The pooled unadjusted relative risk from these studies is 1.4 which, though smaller than the effect seen for maternal smoking (RR = 4.7), still indicates a significant risk. Overall, parental smoking, particularly by the mother, appears to be responsible for between a third and a half of all SIDS cases.

Page: << < prev 9 10 [11] 12 13 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625