Smoke Kills

[JetSwing]

remember the guy who sued hooters for discrimination? didn't he win?

[RVertigo]

Bars without employees?  WTF?

Yeah... Owner and spouse...  With sons/daughters on Fri/Sat.  Those people are all family, not employees.  

That doesn't work in WA though.  The ban is not about employee health.  Even private clubs, which are not public areas, are banned.   :dunno:

Only Tribal Casinos are free from the ban.  I wonder who could have been backing this law.   :lol:  The same law went into effect in Pierce county (without the 25 ft rule), and was repealed in a matter of months.

[RVertigo]

remember the guy who sued hooters for discrimination? didn't he win?

I don't remember that one...  I do remember the Toy Yoda thing though...  She won.  

[Badger]

Smoking is fine, and who wishes to do it can go rigth ahead - but your rights stop where someone else's begins.

Ja - I have no problem with people chewing tobacco, or doing any number of drugs that are snorted, injected, eaten, etc.  But smoking uniquely involves everyone in the vicinity.

As an avid non-drug user who's been in the presence of many people on all manner of illicit substances, I would strongly argue that some drugs do involve everyone in the vicinity.  Have you ever had to deal with someone on a really bad trip?  Dangerous to everyone around.

It's all about perspective.  :dunno:

The long and short of it is this:  smoking is unpopular.  It's an easy target for politicians and legislators.  They can always claim that they have the public health and the best interests of the workers and defenseless children in mind...it's all win for them (the politicians, that is).  Alcohol has no redeeming qualities (other than being tasty and recreational), ultimately causes orders of magnitude more fatalities (of consumers and bystanders alike) than cigarette smoking, and yet there isn't the same stigma to it.  Why?  Becuase it's popular.

Bah.  I'm not saying that they should bring back prohibition.  I'm just generally disheartened by the, "I don't like it, so it should be eliminated" mentality that is the hallmark of the anti-smoking movement.  I don't think the 'it's dangerous to other people' argument holds water when people happliy ignore so many other things that cause so many more fatalities, illnesses, and general malaise becuase it's something they do or like.  

Heck, I think that coughing or sneezing without covering your face should be illegal...I think going out in public with a communicable illness...even a cold...should be against the law.  Leaving the restroom without washing up?  fuggeddaboudit.

If people were to say, "I find the odor offensive" that would be different...then we could come up with ways to eliminate offensive odors.  I'd like to see people get fined for wearing too much perfume, or going too long between bathing.    Hmmm....maybe I'll start a new movement:  "BAN OLD SPICE!"

note:  To prevent this from being misinterpreted...this is not intended to attack anyone or be confrontational in any way.  Interesting discussion.  Everyone is allowed their opinions.  Peace, Love, and Taffy.

[RVertigo]

Heck, I think that coughing or sneezing without covering your face should be illegal...I think going out in public with a communicable illness...even a cold...should be against the law.  Leaving the restroom without washing up?  fuggeddaboudit.

If people were to say, "I find the odor offensive" that would be different...then we could come up with ways to eliminate offensive odors.  I'd like to see people get fined for wearing too much perfume, or going too long between bathing.    Hmmm....maybe I'll start a new movement:  "BAN OLD SPICE!"

The Flu and Food Poisoning are FAR more likely to kill you than 4 hours in a smokey bar.  But, whatever...  Arguing about smoking with non-smokers is pretty much the same as arguing about religion or politics.  Most non-smokers don't see smoking as a freedom...  They see it as a plague.  And most don't see any positive side to the freedom to smoke.  Rather than supporting non-smoking establishments, they want to ban it everywhere.  I think bar owners should have the freedom to choose what legal activities they allow.

I'm on a different bandwagon...  Obesity is the #1 health problem in the US...  I think I'm going to work on a solution for that.  Hmm...  What can I ban...

[Blueknyt]

we should ban everything but soybeans and water. Then regulate how much per person ,perpound, per household, perday.

Force everyone to Bicycle everywhere every other day no matter the weather and swim for 2 hours every other saturday. No kissing or touching anyone,anywhere without Gloves and face mask on Both parties and never ever use them on more then one person.  everyone dresses in white and must wear booties over thier sensable Supportive shoes. each night everyone baths/showers in antibatiral soap and burns thier garments of the day in a certified EPA filtered Mini Incinerator.  NO UNLICENSED, UNSUPERVISED, OR UNSCREEND SEX OR PROCREATION OF ANY LIVING THING will be tolerated.  ALL PROCREATION MUST BE VIA ARTIFICIAL INSEMINATION PROCESS to be handled by Commitee certified Medical personel.  


Did i miss anything?

[banner]

Theres nothing wrong with smoking.

There is definately something wrong with smoking excessively...just like excess in anything else.

A major problem is how the tobacky companies have engineered ciggaretes to be addictive...

Moderation in many things is the key.

[JetSwing]

ok, putting the blame on the tabacco companies is stupid. even the safest cigarette is still addictive and harmful.

no matter how harmful the tabacco companies makes the cigarette, people will still smoke it.

i know what you're trying to say but saying there's nothing wrong with smoking is pushing it. let's say you smoke moderately from age of 17 to old age...smoking would have harmed your body.

studies have showned that second hand smoking is just as bad.

[Badger]

There is definately something wrong with smoking excessively...just like excess in anything else.

This isn't exactly true.  Unlike something like alcohol which causes trouble at certain quantites or concentrations, quantity in cigarette smoking isn't really a factor.  Cigarettes don't actually cause cancer...they increase the risk of cancer developing, and that can happen at any time.  According to the EPA, there is no 'safe' quantity of cigarette smoke...you could have a single cigarette and develop cancer (thus their interpretation of the risks of environemental tobacco smoke [ETS] a.k.a. "second hand smoke")  Moderation is irrelevant....if you're going to smoke at all, you might as well chain smoke.  :dunno:

I'm not trying to defend smoking.  Smoking is a dirty, nasty habit and I wish I had never started. (although I have no intention of stopping).  What I am defending is the liberty to smoke.  Hume said that "it is seldom that any liberty is lost all at once."  In reality, they are taken away slowly and with the support of the people.

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.
- Benjamin Franklin

I'd be a libertarian if it weren't for the fact that all the libertarians I've met are crazy.

[Badger]

Arguing about smoking with non-smokers is pretty much the same as arguing about religion or politics.

+10,000

I'm on a different bandwagon...  Obesity is the #1 health problem in the US...  I think I'm going to work on a solution for that.  Hmm...  What can I ban...

Start with fast food, then soda pop, then move on to high fructose corn syrup and anything that's been "partially hydrogenated".

But why stop there?  Now we're on a roll!  Let's ban SUV's (they kill a lot of innocent people who didn't choose to buy a large, unstable, dangerous vehicles) and non-commercial pickup trucks.  Let's get rid of all those pesky little airplanes that fall out of the sky all the time...they might fall on innocent people.  While we're at it, let's get rid of motorcycles...what possible purpose could those have?  They're just dangerous.  And loud.  And get in my way.  Let's save those foolish people from themselves!

[RVertigo]

Smoking is bad for ya'...  But, many studies have proven your health returns to normal after quitting, depending on how much damage was done...  Odd huh?  So, it takes years to screw yourself up and you can recover from it faster than it took to screw you up.

But, somehow a few hours of smoke can kill you...  Hmm... :dunno:

[JetSwing]

i think it's the opposite...if you screw up for 5 years, it'll take 10 years to recover.

[Phaedrus]

Courtesy of thetruth.com

Tobacco kills more Americans than AIDS, drugs, homicides, fires, and auto accidents combined.

About 1 out of every 5 deaths in the US can be attributed to tobacco products.

Every eight seconds, someone in the world dies due to tobacco.

Cigarette smoke contains 69 chemical compounds that are known cause cancer.

1 out of 3 smokers are estimated to eventually die from a tobacco-related disease.

Over 50,000 people a year die from secondhand smoke in the US alone.

Cigarette smoking is the leading cause of preventable death in the U.S.

The impact of nicotine is jacked up because tobacco companies add ammonia.

In the US, smoking causes about 445 new cases of lung cancer every day.[/b]

[RVertigo]

i think it's the opposite...if you screw up for 5 years, it'll take 10 years to recover.

Nope...  Smoke for ten years and in less that 10 years, you're back to healthy.  In fact, quitting smoking for any amount of time reduces your chances of heart attack and stroke...  The longer you're quit, the better off you are.  Damage from smoking doesn't appear over night...  Or even in a few years.  If smoking was that bad for you, you wouldn't need to worry about smoking bans 'cause smokers would never make it to a bar...  They'd all be dead before 21. :dunno:

Unless you listen to "thetruth.com."   :lol:  They're pretty funny.  'cause tobacco kills everyone that ever had something wrong with them.   :lol:  And second hand smoke is worse that smoking.   :lol: Good one.

[Phaedrus]

Denial is a sad thing  

Forget thetruth.com. Read what the American Lung Association has to say about second hand smoke?  :dunno:

http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422

I don't see where either of them said it was worse than regular smoking but then again, I didn't look that hard.  

[Badger]

And this is why talking about smoking is so much like talking about politics...propeganda and misinformation.  As we all know, there are lies, damn lies, and statistics.

"Smoking is one of the leading causes of statistics"
 - Fletcher Knebel

Courtesy of thetruth.com

Calling it "the truth" does not make it so.

Tobacco kills more Americans than AIDS, drugs, homicides, fires, and auto accidents combined.

The actual statistic is that Smoking related illnesses kill more smokers than those things.  "Smoking related illnesses" include all cancers, all heart disease, all strokes, and lung deseases like empysema.  If you have ever had a cigarette and then have a heart attack you are part of that statistic.  It helps their numbers that heart disease is still the #1 cause of death in the U.S.  Mostly caused by cigarette smoking?  Doubtful...more likely caused by aging, sedentary lifestyle, poor diet, genetics, or any of the hundreds of other things that cause heart disease.  Looks good in their statistics though.  It is very important when reading these statistics to remember that correlation does not equal causation.

The rest of the death statistics use the same funny accounting and nebulous correlation to get the political impact and outrage they are looking for.  

It is also important to note, since many publications cite the 1993 EPA classification of cigarette smoke as a Class A carcinogen (in "Respiratory Health Effects of Passive Smoking: Lung Cancer and Other Disorders; EPA/600/6-90/006 F) that this finding (along with other components of the study) was vacated by a federal court (Judge Osteen) in 1999 becuase they found that the "EPA disregarded information and made findings on selective information; ... deviated from its [standard procedures]; failed to dislose important findings and reasoning; and left significant questions without answers."  Many places that tout the EPA's 1993 document fail to point this out.  There was a subsequent ruling that overturned some of Judge Osteen's rulings for judicial reasons, but they did not change the basic premise of the ruling concerning his findings about the behavior or motives of the EPA.

As for the "over 50,000" people that die each year from second hand smoke.  The original figure for second hand smoke released by the EPA was 53,000.  I assume this is where this number comes from.  Of course, this number was determined before they actually did a study.  After compiling information from the 31 reports used in the study process, they came up with a figure of only 3,000 deaths.  Even this number...3,000...was part of the 1993 report that was vacated by the federal judge.

thetruth is anti-smoking propeganda, plain and simple.

[RVertigo]

Dude...  Really.  I know smoking is bad, but look at the stats you posted.  Do the math.  It's pretty funny.

They say 1 out of 5 deaths are because of smoking...  and 1 out of 3 smokers die because of smoking...  And every 8 seconds someone dies from smoking...  So, 3,942,000 people die every year from smoking...  But, here is says 57,000,000 die every year...  If 1 in 5 deaths is because of smoking, that would mean that 11,400,000 (20%) died because of smoking, but 2 out of 3 were smokers that died from something not smoking related...  So...  11,400,000 died from smoking + they're saying that another 30,400,000 people smoked... 41.8 million out of 57 million people smoked?  So, only 15 million didn't smoke?  

They basically guess at the numbers...  It's silly.

Number of US deaths in 2002: 2,443,387
Death rate: 847.3 deaths per 100,000 population
Life expectancy: 77.3 years

Number of deaths for leading causes of death:

Heart disease: 696,947
Cancer: 557,271
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 162,672
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 124,816
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 106,742
Diabetes: 73,249
Influenza/Pneumonia: 65,681
Alzheimer's disease: 58,866
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 40,974
Septicemia: 33,865[/list:u]
Obesity is more likely to cause Heart Disease and Strokes than smoking.  And it causes Diabetes.

Obesity can also be prevented...  So, if we're talking about health, how about we keep the ball rolling?  Make everything that's bad for you illegal.  

[Phaedrus]

:lol: Smokers are just as dogmatic as non-smokers...if nto worse.  The only thing is, non-smokers don't think they have to rationalize and justify them NOT smoking. Smokers always get defensive. Do what you want.

I didn't make up the stats. One fact of reality, though, is that you smoking in public creates an offensive byproduct that infringes on the rights of people who choose not to smoke. Why should other people have to breath in your dirty air? :dunno:

Smoking is not a natural act. You have every right in the world to smoke; but you have no right to infringe on others. Remember "your rights stop where another's begins".

I think smoking should be outlawed in all public places everywhere in the country.

[Badger]

Forget thetruth.com. Read what the American Lung Association has to say about second hand smoke?  :dunno:

http://www.lungusa.org/site/pp.asp?c=dvLUK9O0E&b=35422

I don't see where either of them said it was worse than regular smoking but then again, I didn't look that hard.  

Apparently they didn't look that hard either.  Note that the bases for a good deal of this information hinges on the 1993 EPA study, found in federal court to be biased and predetermined.  :dunno:  

The U.S. Department of Energy (Oak Ridge National Labs) did a study on the prolonged effect of second hand smoke on non-smoking bartenders, waiters, and waitresses (released in 2000).  They concluded that exposure to "respirable suspended particulable matter" was less than 1/6 of OSHA's allowable level.  None of the 173 non-smokers that took part in the study showed any difference in lung function.  They determined that people in these positions take in the equivalent of six cigarettes per year.  Why do you think it is that we don't see those contradictory findings on the National Lung Association's site?  Even though the findings are more recent than 10 of the 13 sources listed?

Look...I'm not saying smoking is good for you.  I'm just saying that the danger of second hand smoke has been grossly overstated.

[RVertigo]

I think smoking should be outlawed in all public places everywhere in the country.

So should wearing too much perfume...  And now showering...  :dunno:

But, whatever...  Your point is my point...  Why not have a designated enclosed area where the smokers are forced to hide?  Why put them out on the street where they'll bother more people?