Smoking should it be ban?

Originally posted by Storm
Yes I drink alcohol beverages but with moderation. The amount of alcohol I drink isn' t a menace for my health. I' ve never been drunk.

And don' t let us start on that again, that thread is still lingering.

but wait now, that is completely relavent. i smoke AT MOST a third of a pack a day. many folks only smoke a cigarette once in a blue moon when they have a drink.

the point im making is, although YOU drink responsibly, other people kill themselves with alcohol, and even worse, they kill and hurt others.

if you think that cigarettes should be banned utterly than the same logic should lead to the banning of alcohol.

I didn' t say it wasn' t relevant at all. I meant that it was a pretty heavy discussion back then and acohol banning was involved.

The "facts" about the dangers of somking are usually blown way out of proportion by the anti smoking folks, or "health nazis" as they were so elequantly called earlier..

For instance, for smoking to have a permaneant effect on ones health (if they are a healthy individual without preceeding lung problems) they have to smoke heavily for 20 years or more (and even that is not concrete, for alot of people, there will be no peramaneant negatives caused by smoking unless they smoke all their lives). Anything less is easily reversible if they should quit. It's funny, all the people who "die" from cigarette smoking are always old and would probably be dying anyways from something else. Dying from smoking is as good a cause of death as any other if you ask me.

Also, in my argument class we happened to discuss this same topic this week, and the teacher said that the dangers of second hand smoke isn't nearly as major as people make it out to be. This is true, for second hand smoke to have an effect on you you have to prety much be sitting in a closed room with someone who smokes almost constantly and for many years. Most of the people who have "died from second hand smoke" already had health problem to begin with and they probably would have gotten sick ragaurdless. The only way second hand smoke can have serious ramifications on a person who isn't around smokers constantly is if they already have serious lung problems, and in this case, it's their responsibility to get away from smokers.

Originally posted by BackFire
Also, in my argument class we happened to discuss this same topic this week, and the teacher said that the dangers of second hand smoke isn't nearly as major as people make it out to be.

So, what now?

Originally posted by BackFire
The "facts" about the dangers of somking are usually blown way out of proportion by the anti smoking folks, or "health nazis" as they were so elequantly called earlier..

good point backfire.

we must remember the old saying "figures don't lie, but liars figure"
many deaths attributed to cigarettes are really not solely cause by them.
lets take genetic weakness. say a certain person is unlucky enough to have a
family history of lung cancer or heart disease...certainly not a rare case.
now, lets say that person smoked a pack a day, and this person dies cancer or a heart attack.

the figures will tell you that in this case cigarettes killed them.
a direct connection, no other cause...
in such cases, cigarettes accelerated an existing problem, but didnt cause it.
not the overall case, but an example.

as far as second hand smoke goes, backfire is correct. a whiff of second hand smoke at a bar is not going to give you cancer, you will not get a heart attack...at worst the smell will stick to you and your eyes may water if the smoke goes right in them. but you are not going to die from it unless possibly you live in a closed area with a chain smoker. and i mean a person who smokes with the windows closed, just lingering smoke constantly.

"Funny, since we also discussed the same topic in my class this week. And the teacher said that the dangers of second hand smoke are not as innocent as people make it out to be and should not be lightly taken.

So, what now?"

Take a read at the rest of the paragraph where I actually go into detail exactly WHY second hand smoke isn't all that dangerous in reality. I never said it wasn't a problem, simply that the people who act like "omg if you are around a smoker for 5 minutes you'll get lung cancer!!!!!!" are stupid. It takes a LONG time for second hand smoke to cause damage to a healthy person. You're not going to bet cancer from second hand smoke by sitting next to some guy on the bus who is smoking.

"And that' s an argument that is commonly used by pro smokers."

Yeah, too bad I'm not a pro smoker. I think it's extremely stupid and pointless,and have never had a puff in my life. But that doesn't mean I'm going to go all nazi on the people who do smoke and try to take away something that gives them some comfort and allows them to relax. It's not my business, and if I'm around someone who's smoking, instead of running around whining about it, I'll take the 3 seconds it takes to move 4 feet away from them. Or if that's not an option, simply ask them if they don't mind putting out the cigarette because it's bothering me. Most smokers aren't the demons they're made out to be. If you ask niceley for someone to put out a cigarette if you're near them, most of the time they will do it. No big deal.

I move away from them. But when I' m in a restaurant and they do mind putting it out (which happened), do I have to take my dish and go outside?

Some of the immediate effects of passive smoking include eye irritation, headache, cough, sore throat, dizziness and nausea. Adults with asthma can experience a significant decline in lung function when exposed, while new cases of asthma may be induced in children whose parents smoke. Short term exposure to tobacco smoke also has a measurable effect on the heart in non-smokers. Just 30 minutes exposure is enough to reduce coronary blood flow.

In the longer term, passive smokers suffer an increased risk of a range of smoking-related diseases. Non-smokers who are exposed to passive smoking in the home, have a 25 per cent increased risk of heart disease and lung cancer. A major review by the Government-appointed Scientific Committee on Tobacco and Health (SCOTH) concluded that passive smoking is a cause of lung cancer and ischaemic heart disease in adult non-smokers, and a cause of respiratory disease, cot death, middle ear disease and asthmatic attacks in children. A more recent review of the health impacts of passive smoking by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) noted that "the evidence is sufficient to conclude that involuntary smoking is a cause of lung cancer in never smokers."

A study published in the British Medical Journal suggests that previous studies of the effects of passive smoking on the risk of heart disease may have been underestimated. The researchers found that blood cotinine levels among non-smokers were associated with a 50-60% increased risk of heart disease.

Originally posted by BackFire
It's funny, all the people who "die" from cigarette smoking are always old and would probably be dying anyways from something else.

A distinction between old and young people was made.

Almost half of all children in the UK are exposed to tobacco smoke at home. Passive smoking increases the risk of lower respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis, pneumonia and bronchiolitis in children. One study found that in households where both parents smoke, young children have a 72 per cent increased risk of respiratory illnesses. Passive smoking causes a reduction in lung function and increased severity in the symptoms of asthma in children, and is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children. Passive smoking is also associated with middle ear infection in children as well as possible cardiovascular impairment and behavioural problems.

Infants of parents who smoke are more likely to be admitted to hospital for bronchitis and pneumonia in the first year of life. More than 17,000 children under the age of five are admitted to hospital every year because of the effects of passive smoking. Passive smoking during childhood predisposes children to developing chronic obstructive airway disease and cancer as adults. 14 Exposure to tobacco smoke may also impair olfactory function in children. A Canadian study found that passive smoking reduced children' s ability to detect a wide variety of odours compared with children raised in non-smoking households. Passive smoking may also affect children?s mental development. A US study found deficits in reading and reasoning skills among children even at low levels of smoke exposure.

I think the point or at least my point is....nonsmokers have a tendency to be extremely arrogant towards those that do smoke. I dont know if you all cant help it or what, but most smokers are pretty laid back and they just to be left in peace to have a cigarette and the places where they can do this are shrinking by the year. First it was inside public places, ok fine we'll give you that one. But now the anti-smokers want to make it illegal to smoke outside. I wonder are the same people planning on moving out of their smog choked cities?

and Im ashamed to admit this but, all 3 of my children aged 22, 21 and 11 have been exposed to second hand smoke at one time or another, AND I smoked while I was pregnant. I KNOW HUGE NO NO. But it should also be said that NOT A ONE of them had anymore colds, lung problems, etc etc than any other kid in their class. My youngest has literally had to have prescription medicine like 5 times since she was born and shes 11. I just think this like everything else is totally blown out of proportion. DO you know there are people that have smoked for the better part of their lives and lived to be over 100?

I think you are either predisposed to this stuff or you arent IMHO.

Originally posted by Jedi Priestess
I think the point or at least my point is....nonsmokers have a tendency to be extremely arrogant towards those that do smoke.

Im sorry but thats absolute bull.

Would you mind if you had a weed smoker sitting next to your children smoking weed? Would you mind if an heroin addict was snorting heroin in a caffee next to you?

Would you be fine with it? And if not, why not?

"I move away from them. But when I' m in a restaurant and they do mind putting it out (which happened), do I have to take my dish and go outside?"

No, but I would suggest going to a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking. If there are any where you live.

For all those statistics, you don't give any percentages. What percent of kids/people actually see these effects from second hand smoke? Probably very few. I know alot of people who grew up around cigarette smoke, and they have a perfect bill of health. Obviously, people with asthma should not be around cigarette smoke. This is common sense. Again, if you don't like second hand smoke and don't want to risk all of those problems that may or may not happen to someone if they are around second hand smoke, simply don't go to places that allow smoking. Problem solved.

"Almost half of all children in the UK are exposed to tobacco smoke at home. Passive smoking increases the risk of lower respiratory tract infections such as bronchitis, pneumonia and bronchiolitis in children. One study found that in households where both parents smoke, young children have a 72 per cent increased risk of respiratory illnesses. Passive smoking causes a reduction in lung function and increased severity in the symptoms of asthma in children, and is a risk factor for new cases of asthma in children. Passive smoking is also associated with middle ear infection in children as well as possible cardiovascular impairment and behavioural problems."

Again, I never argued that constant second hand smoke causes problems. In fact, I said that that's the ONLY way serious ramifications will occur to someone who has a good bill of health. You are showing me nothing here, other then bad parenting. Obviously, you should not smoke around kids. This is something that SHOULD BE against the law. Because a child has no choice but to suffer from second hand smoke, he can't just walk away, he can't move, he has to live there.

To sum up what I said, never, NEVER did I say there were no problem associated with high levels of second hand smoke. I know there are and recognize most of them. However, it's naive to blame a smoker for second hand smoke (unless it's for a child, in which case parents who smoke around kids should be kicked in the head, something I forgot to address in my last post). If an adult is 'suffering' from second hand smoke in a restaurant, don't go to a restaurant that allows smoking. If you live with smokers, go outside or stay in another room if it bothers you. No adult is forced to sit near someone who smokes, nor are they forced to live with or date someone who smokes. If it bothers them so much, simply go somwhere else.

to me, there are 'non-smokers' and people who dont smoke.

people who dont smoke...dont smoke. their lungs are healthy, their heart is healthy, they made the wise choice of not smoking, and thus are usually healthier than the smoker.

and now the "non-smokers". the very name says it all. a group of people who have formed their own unit againsts people who smoke and consider themselves to be better, smarter, less annoying...etc. like the people who dont smoke, their lungs are healthy, their heart is healthy, they made the wise choice of not smoking, and thus are usually healthier than the smoker.
only the non-smoker has become a group of hypocondriacs. now they cant *god forbid* get a WHIFF of ciragette smoke or it will just KILL them.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Im sorry but thats absolute bull.

Would you mind if you had a weed smoker sitting next to your children smoking weed? Would you mind if an heroin addict was snorting heroin in a caffee next to you?

Would you be fine with it? And if not, why not?

OK LIL I love ya I really do, but you would not believe the dirty looks I have gotten while standing outside BY MYSELF NOT ANYWHERE NEAR another human being simply because I was SMOKING! Im not saying ALL nosmokers have that mentality but a great many do my friend.

And I have to agree with pvs on that there are non-smokers and people who dont smoke.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Im sorry but thats absolute bull.

Would you mind if you had a weed smoker sitting next to your children smoking weed? Would you mind if an heroin addict was snorting heroin in a caffee next to you?

Would you be fine with it? And if not, why not?

i think JP is referring more to the attitude of nonsmokers, because they tend to look down their noses at smokers, even if they are not in contact with their smoke...as if smokers are just lowlife junkies.

perhaps attitudes are different overseas, but in america, its very true.

"Would you mind if you had a weed smoker sitting next to your children smoking weed? Would you mind if an heroin addict was snorting heroin in a caffee next to you?"

Most people would have a problem with that because those are illegal drugs, where as smoking is legal. Big difference, lil.

"Would you mind if you had a weed smoker sitting next to your children smoking weed?"

i would tell my kids to cover their ears and close their eyes.
then i would ask the person to pass it over 😂

Originally posted by BackFire
No, but I would suggest going to a restaurant that doesn't allow smoking. If there are any where you live.

For all those statistics, you don't give any percentages. What percent of kids/people actually see these effects from second hand smoke? Probably very few. I know alot of people who grew up around cigarette smoke, and they have a perfect bill of health. Obviously, people with asthma should not be around cigarette smoke. This is common sense. Again, if you don't like second hand smoke and don't want to risk all of those problems that may or may not happen to someone if they are around second hand smoke, simply don't go to places that allow smoking. Problem solved.

Originally posted by Storm
There aren' t any. Smoking is allowed in bars and restaurants and you can' t find any without smoke. Smoking is not allowed at the movies but still you do smell it so it' s being ignored.
I am daily confronted with smokers.
You can' t smoke in my entire college building except at 1 place, the bloody entrance. All the smokers gather at the entrance while the smoke is spreading over the entire hall.

Damn Storm, that sucks. Sorry to hear that. There are NO restaurants that don't have smoking? Do they at least have non smokers sitting in their own section?

Sure, smokers and non smokers areas seperated by only air. That will help a lot.

see, i agree with storm in that she has the right to not come into constant contact with cigarette smoke. in the case where she has to pass smokers at an indoor entrance to where she goes to class, which defeats the purpose of the rule. people do make stupid rules pertaining to smokers, but you cant blame the smoker. blame the idiot who decared that the only smoking spot would be indoors in the very location where EVERYONE walks.

Originally posted by Storm
Sure, smokers and non smokers areas seperated by only air. That will help a lot.

in jersey, many places have smoking and nonsmoking separated by glass.