Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

according to this article, a new extensive report says that second-hand smoke is conclusively very "dangerous". nevermind how penn and teller had that great episode of hbo's bullshit, in which they revealed that the "conclusive proof" of the danger of second hand smoke amounted to a single study that was blown massively out of proportion. i'm not arguing that second-hand smoke isn't bad for you, but this sounds seriously overblown.

the money shot:

quote:

---

The 700-page report cites "massive and conclusive scientific evidence" of the "alarming" public health threat posed by secondhand smoke and finds smoking bans are the only way to protect non-smokers.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

oh and this side-caption is great...

quote:

---

According to a Surgeon General's report, separate smoking sections do not protect non-smokers from secondhand smoke.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2002
Location:
Posts: 332

There have been many studies that have reached the same conclusion that second hand smoke is a killer. They should just ban smoking.... oh ya they get too many taxes to do that...

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

Well I know FOR A FACT that Flagulence is highly explosive!
I think that shitting in public restrooms should be OUTLAWED cause I don't want that explosive shit entering my lungs.
Think about it. A flagulence has like...BILLIONS of shit particles spewing our atmosphere. Those particles go in your lungs when your breathing then it clings to your lung walls. Then some of that actually reaches your blood stream.
I say,I DON'T WANT YOUR SHIT IN MY BLOOD STREAM!!
We must act now. For the children!
For the children.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Risus There have been many studies that have reached the same conclusion that second hand smoke is a killer.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Large Filipino Well I know FOR A FACT that Flagulence is highly explosive!

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

YEA! That.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

You know....Colorado's smoking ban law passed and would be effective July 1st. Already you can't smoke anywhere,and people can rat you out.
There's gonna be a lot of crime here.
A lot.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

Cars pollute but it's oh kay cause we have to get to work.
Trucks pollute but it's oh kay cause without them,America stops.
There's no debate about how much CARBON MONOXIDE goes in the air cause we need this shit for America to run.
So we pick on Smokers.
And soon we will find out what a big mistake that was.
Cause we haven't figured out that some smokers without their smokes turn into HOMOCIDAL MANIACS BRANISHING MACHINE GUNS READY TO CLEAR THEIR PLACE OF WORK AND THE WORLD HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!!!!!!!!!

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Jul 2000
Location: Beatrice, Nebraska
Posts: 18506

Battered. Chapped. Pussy.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

The pinnacle of Failbot technology.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35568

The anti-smoking laws that have been passed are mostly based on the Health and Safety in the workplace issue; there are regulations about working conditions for employees already, minimum legal standards as to what is 'safe', regardless of any 'well, the employees should have taken jobs elsewhere' arguments. f you have a problem with the smoking bans, that is where to take aim, at the fact that government regulates Health and Safety in the workplace; if you accept that they can, then it's just an issue of whether this is dangerous enough for governments to regulate. If you don't think that the government can regulate Health and Safety in the workplace issues, then that is where your primary objection to most (although not all; there are some complete bans on smoking outside at all, I believe) of the smoking bans lies. A related issue is how much liability employers should have for harm suffered by their employees in the course of their work.

Ignore the historical asbestos cases and look at the question thus: now that the risks from asbestos are known, can/should government regulate the ability of employers to expose employees to asbestos (not secretly, but up front in the job description). How much civil liability should they have for the results? I suspect that the Libertarian point of view would be that so long as the employee is aware, they weight that risk against other risks (not eating because of having no job, losing their house/apartment/trailer for the same reason) and take the statistical shortening of their life as part of the bargain (in the knowledge that having no food or shelter is likely to shorten their life by more than asbestos is).

Last edited by Smug Git on 06-29-2006 at 05:40 PM

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2004
Location: USA
Posts: 24317

.

Attachment: sgwarning.jpg
This has been downloaded 68 time(s).

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 3650

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I heard a report the other day that the mongs that be are trying to ban people smoking outside the premises i.e offices . I didn't catch the grounds of the ban.

If these cunts want to stop smokers smoking they should stop selling this highly addictive drug.....yeah we all know why they don't!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location: summer!
Posts: 10474

drug free society, i can hardly wait.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35568

There's no doubt that banning other drugs has stopped their use, after all. And we can look across the Atlantic to see how fantastically well Prohibition has worked.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 3650

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smug Git
There's no doubt that banning other drugs has stopped their use, .

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

You're in your office. You get a little stressed out. You want a ciggarette and there's a pack in your pocket. You take your break but when you go outside to the smoke area,the ash bucket is gone and is replaced with a sign "Because we care about your health,there is no smoking allowed anywhere in this campus. By the time you go out to the street,smoke and return,you would have spent too much time on your break,or in some cases,you are not allowed to smoke out in the street or EVEN INSIDE YOUR FUCKING CAR as long as your car is on the lot. So you put your smokes away and get back to work,but you are just as stressed out returning as when you took your break.
The only relief you get is in your car on the way to work and in your car after work.
But wait. Some people carpool with non smokers,or take the bus with the bus stop showing no smoking within 100 feet or something. So then you can't light up for like 9 hours in a day. Days turn into weeks.....stress building....stress....STRESS.

This ban is DANGEROUS,man.

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location: wookin pa nub
Posts: 10279

The best thing that could be done to curtail the bad side effects of smoking would be to force the cig. companies to use only pure tobacco, and not paper soaked in a mixture of tobacco juice and addictive substances.

And several of you are going to say that there is nicotene in tobacco juice, and that it is itself addictive. I'll have to call bullshit. I've been a pipe smoker (not a pole smoker, goddamn you) for about three years now. The pipe smokers' clubs that I belong to are full of guys from 18 to 80+ years of age, and almost none of them are addicted to it. How do I know? Because during the hot summer months, most people don't smoke theirs pipes because it's too hot. I doubt seriously that a smoker of mass-produced coffin nails could pull that off.

The same report that originally said that smoking cigarettes shortened your lifespan, said that men who started smoking a pipe in their early thirties were likely to outlive a non-smoker.

Why? Most people I know who smoke a pipe don't inhale the smoke. Most enjoy the "ritual" associated with smoking a bowl of pipe tobacco. It is very relaxing.

And though many may think it a poor comparison, water, which is essential for good health, can kill you if you drink too much. Same with tobacco. It is the dose that determines how it affects you. Too high a dose of anything isn't good for you. Small doses can be beneficial.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Apr 2005
Location: wookin pa nub
Posts: 10279

quote:

---

almost none of them are addicted to it

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Aug 2001
Location: Hilbert Space
Posts: 35568

If you don't inhale the smoke, you won't be taking so much nicotine onboard (not much at all is absorbed into the mouth, I don't think). As I understand it, nicotine has been shown to be very addictive, although the withdrawal side-effects aren't as severe as they are for some other addictive drugs.

If pipesmokers live longer than non-pipesmokers (although I've not seen the study or studies that show it) that could be a selection effect based on what sort of people choose to smoke a pipe nowadays. Although a big study would have compensated for that, I guess. I think that mouth and throat cancer are risks from smoking a pipe, but it's not like cigarette smoking and lung cancer.

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Mar 2005
Location: SEATTLE
Posts: 1932

quote:

---

Originally posted by Smug Git that is where to take aim, at the fact that government regulates Health and Safety in the workplace; if you accept that they can, then it's just an issue of whether this is dangerous enough for governments to regulate.

---

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged

Registered: Feb 2004
Location: in colorado somewhere!
Posts: 25636

[p]

__________________

[Ignore Sig]

EEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!

Report this post to a moderator | IP: Logged