Secondhand smoke debate 'over' (1 Viewer)

[The Pi Pirate]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-27-involuntary-smoking_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

A victory for the ban-smoking crew?

 

[aps]

http://www.usatoday.com/news/health/2006-06-27-involuntary-smoking_x.htm?POE=NEWISVA

A victory for the ban-smoking crew?

I sure hope so.

 

[doughgirl]

Of course I do not smoke or drink....but

I was thinking about the negative aspects of smoking compared to those of drinking and I have to honestly say.....

About 18 million Americans experience problems with

alcohol use and 10 million are alcoholics.


Alcohol is involved in:

53% of all highway deaths

50% of spouse abuse cases

38% of child abuse cases

65% of drownings

54% of those in jail for violent crimes -- and 49% of those

convicted for murder or attempted murder -- had been drinking when they committed those crimes

http://orion.csuchico.edu/Archives/Volume34/Issue2/Dimensions/Thdaofalab.html

I'd take smokers over drinkers anyday.

 

[erasamus snoggle]

The problems involving alcohol have been documented by centuries of data. It is infuriating that one can drive through a Suburban full of nuns & orphans while stinking drunk & get probation (or less) while the same judge will throw the book at someone caught in possession of marijuana. It's long past time to change the laws regarding the possession and use of a common weed.

 

[zymurgy]

I've always considered it a forgone conclusion that second-hand smoke is a health hazard.

I feel the same about engine exhaust, leaf burning, chemical odors found in paint and other corrosives, and so on.

So what are we gonna do about it? Should we tell boaters its all over? Shut recreational driving down? Home improvements are taboo?

 

[aps]

I've always considered it a forgone conclusion that second-hand smoke is a health hazard.

I feel the same about engine exhaust, leaf burning, chemical odors found in paint and other corrosives, and so on.

So what are we gonna do about it? Should we tell boaters its all over? Shut recreational driving down? Home improvements are taboo?

As long as the smokers are having their rights slowly taken away, I don't care what we do about that other stuff.

 

[DeeJayH]

Of course I do not smoke or drink....but

I was thinking about the negative aspects of smoking compared to those of drinking and I have to honestly say.....



I'd take smokers over drinkers anyday.

LOL, thats interesting

:applaud

 

[Befuddled_Stoner]

Skimming through that link confirmed what I already suspected: cigarette smoke is bad for you. As shocking and alarming as this breaking news it, I’ve got to agree with zymurgy, that lots of **** that we’re exposed to every day is likely to be just as bad for you.

*briefly wonders what sodium benzoate does to the human body, shrugs, and takes another bite of his cereal bar*

Something I’ve wondered, why are cigarettes so bad for you? From what I’ve heard (in circles not exactly reknown for erudition), tobacco in and of itself isn’t tremendously terrible; that it’s mainly all the toxically addictive sludge the manufacturers lop on top of it that makes it eat cancerous holes through your lungs. In light of this report, and coming from my admittedly under-informed ex-smoker perspective, it seems like the tobacco industry would be better off acquiescing to content regulation than being suffocated by nationwide bans on smoking. Any smokers out there who can tell us how the flavor/potency of plain, home grown tobacco compares to the um…fortified product that comes out of a carton?

 

[DeeJayH]

Skimming through that link confirmed what I already suspected: cigarette smoke is bad for you. As shocking and alarming as this breaking news it, I’ve got to agree with zymurgy, that lots of **** that we’re exposed to every day is likely to be just as bad for you.

*briefly wonders what sodium benzoate does to the human body, shrugs, and takes another bite of his cereal bar*

Something I’ve wondered, why are cigarettes so bad for you? From what I’ve heard (in circles not exactly reknown for erudition), tobacco in and of itself isn’t tremendously terrible; that it’s mainly all the toxically addictive sludge the manufacturers lop on top of it that makes it eat cancerous holes through your lungs. In light of this report, and coming from my admittedly under-informed ex-smoker perspective, it seems like the tobacco industry would be better off acquiescing to content regulation than being suffocated by nationwide bans on smoking. Any smokers out there who can tell us how the flavor/potency of plain, home grown tobacco compares to the um…fortified product that comes out of a carton?

my brother is a Handy-man
when he went for surgery, he had to answer a questionaire, which asked which harmful agents he may have been exposed to
He answered yes to virtually every chemical
so, as he sees it, cigarettes are pretty close to his last concern

 

[MrFungus420]

Something I’ve wondered, why are cigarettes so bad for you? From what I’ve heard (in circles not exactly reknown for erudition), tobacco in and of itself isn’t tremendously terrible; that it’s mainly all the toxically addictive sludge the manufacturers lop on top of it that makes it eat cancerous holes through your lungs

Actually, it is the radioactivity.

Tobacco requires a high phosphorus fertilizer, and the phosphorus is made from grinding naturally occuring "ore" (I'm not sure if ore is the right word in this case). There are a couple of radioactive isotopes that also occur in the rock that they use to get the phosphorus, and they accumulate in the soil. After a time, enough accumulates that the isotopes start getting absorbed by the tobacco plants.

I've seen estimates that up to 90% of the deleterious effects of smoking are due to the radioactive isotopes, not the tobacco itself.