2nd hand smoke kills people it is not "blown out of proportion"
2nd hand smoke kills people it is not "blown out of proportion"
workers rights should not go away
You're sure about that? Someone has taken a look? With a bronchoscope? You've had pulmonary function testing? You got an unconditional guarantee of good health for the forseeable future from your doctor? I don't know how old you are, but I'd probably hold off on absolutes for a few years.
I don't think we're talking about lectures. I believe we are discussing legally limiting where smokers can smoke around nonsmokers.
Actually, if someone is blaring rap music at a decibel level that will injure your hearing, it is your business and has nothing to do with what they enjoy. We're not discussing likes and dislikes. We're discussing health.
And don't get me started on parents who expose their children to cigarette smoke. Children are usually ignored when they politely ask their parents to step downwind or quit. Born and unborn babies don't have a chance to ask their parents to stop smoking. One could argue that it is child abuse. I'm sure that will get people riled up, but, if your baby dies of SIDS because you smoked while pregnant, is that really much different than a baby who dies because his or her mother took drugs while pregnant?
A little food for thought:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK44318/
All of my relatives on both sides of the family who made it past age 80 did not smoke. I don't smoke. When you think in order to have a more enjoyable life means doing something that can shorten your life, don't expect everyone else nearby to join in on your enthusiasm.
I am very polite and caring when I smoke to the people around me until they decide to make a big deal out of it and that is when I decide to not care anymore and will give my best effort to get them to leave.
If a business allows smoking I have every right to smoke in that business. Why do people who moan and groan about smoking go into a business that allows smoking? People like that seem to have personal control issues in my opinion. The seen to expect the red carpet treatment when they enter a business and expect other to react to them for some reason.
The people who throw spastic fits about smoking have bought into the propaganda that fills the airways about smoking. It is a form of brainwashing and weak minded people are easily brainwashed.
If you were truly being 'polite and caring' then they wouldn't be making a 'big deal out of it.' But, obviously if they have to smell it and inhale it then you're not being 'polite and caring.'
Of course the best part is, you can whine and cry all you want about it, but you (and other smokers) keep getting pushed further and further into irrelevance.
Your rights end where mine begin.
I'm an ex smoker, except for a cigar now and then, but I still think the owner should have the right to decide if they allow smoking or not. It should be clear for anybody that wants to work or go in there it allows smoking so you are either working or being there at your own risk. Nobody is forcing an employee to work at a business that allows smoking nor are non smokers being forced to give that establishment their business. If you don't like smoking then don't give that place your business or don't apply for a job there. Let folks take some responsibility for themselves instead of making everybody do it.
You sir or madam, are at best exceptionally ignorant or being deliberately obtuse.
My daughter is the only one of her friends who doesn't smoke. That's because her daddy took her on rounds with him at the hospital. At age 4, she went up to someone who was smoking and said, "Don't you know if you do that they cut your face off?" Turns out one of of the patients they'd seen that morning had had a hemi-facectomy for oropharyngeal cancer. From smoking. She was only 4, but she was a quick learner.
Ok, so that's a statement supporting smoking kills, not secondhand. In fact, I see person after person in this thread talking about how long those non-smokers they know or in their families have lived. Did they really manage to never be around smokers? Especially since, if you lived past 80 (hell if you're over 40) you lived in times that many restaurants/business were full smoking. How are all those poor people who were exposed to second hand smoke living to be 80+, and all those smokers dying so young? Should those non-smokers die young too?
Not that I think secondhand smoke is harmless. I pretty much accept that it's dangerous. I'm a non-smoker with asthma, and I'm pretty sure it's from my father's smoking. I just see over and over again in this discussion people using a smoker dying or non-smokers living as some sort of proof that second hand smoke kills. I don't see the logic connect.
This is all I really need..... http://www.cancer.org/Cancer/CancerC...condhand-smoke Call it propaganda, but its from a respected source.
I say let the smokers smoke - its just another way to thin out the herd. With the downside being the rest of us often have to pay their self-inflicted medical bills.
On the passive smoke fraud
John Dunn, MD -- Article Published: 05/11/2008
[...]The second hand smoke population studies are a secret joke in the epidemiology and public health field, because there is a devoted and fanatic group that knows they are playing with people’s cancer and health fears. The fanatics of the church of the stubbed cigarette know that smoking prohibition can only be accomplished by the second hand smoke panic but the data and research for their crusade are weak and unreliable. They also know that the media make panicmongering an art form. So the fanatics exaggerate, have the suburban housewives and mothers as well as nervous politicians in a panic to protect the kids, the handsome and earnest physician on TV reads the claims that cigarette smoke is killing thousands of American kids in the streets, more deaths in America than you can imagine. It’s a wonder we haven’t had violence, but that is so far.
As an emergency physician, I am a toxicologist by training and necessity, I know that the anti smoking physicians are campaigning to eliminate cigarette smoking, and couldn’t be bothered by a lack of good science on second hand smoke. Toxicology is about dose, and second hand smoke in its worst case is less than a cigarette a day. Smoking a cigarette a day is not a cancer or any other health risk, thanks to the fact that the dose is insignificant and bodies are not that fragile. The studies on health effects of ETS all show effects in small ranges below level of proof[...]
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Bookmarks