My Message to All Smoker and Non-Smoker

As in my previous posts I am against any ban on tobacco unless they ban many other things also; including items leading / causing / promoting obesity.

Here are the facts that these “anti-smoking discriminating” jerks do not want the public to know.

Main causes of carbon monoxide: Carbon Monoxide Sources

Sources of Carbon Monoxide

Unvented kerosene and gas space heaters; leaking chimneys and furnaces; back-drafting from furnaces, gas water heaters, wood stoves, and fireplaces; gas stoves; generators and other gasoline powered equipment; automobile exhaust from attached garages; and tobacco smoke. Incomplete oxidation during combustion in gas ranges and unvented gas or kerosene heaters may cause high concentrations of CO in indoor air. Worn or poorly adjusted and maintained combustion devices (e.g., boilers, furnaces) can be significant sources, or if the flue is improperly sized, blocked, disconnected, or is leaking. Auto, truck, or bus exhaust from attached garages, nearby roads, or parking areas can also be a source.

Bottom of the line, many deaths and cancer are conveniently blamed on tobacco product second hand smoke. While yes there may be some legitimate instances,but most are falsely blamed. My grandfather died in his sleep because of old age. Coronor's diagnosis for death stated from smoking because he did smoke for 2 years back when he was serving in WWII. Since then, he had not smoked anything for over 60 years! BS

Many of these causes of lung cancer need to look towards more common practiced by all and not just smokers. As my source states above there are numerous sources of carbon monoxide besides tobacco. Which we all breath on a regular basis both smokers and non-smokers.

EPA chart rating carbon monoxide sources

OMG! Smoking is not #1 here... YOUR CARS ARE. National average of almost 63 Million TONS come out of our cars! Blame rush hour traffic for your daily dose of cancer promoting carbon monoxide. Clear and odorless gas we breath VAST amounts of daily without knowing it. Smoking falls under the category MISC which includes many other sources as well!Source Category Breakdown

Bottom of the line. GET OFF your high horses and get informed. You attack smoking because of the smell. Your true area for banning and attack to blame most health problems are your modes of transportation. My sources are from the EPA. Do not spout back statements which you cannot justify from reliable sources.

Leave us alone. Smokers need to be aware of those who do not smoke and be kind and courteous not blowing smoke in their direction and abiding laws. Non-Smokers need to be courteous towards smokers by leaving us alone. It is our CHOICE.

We live in America where we can make our own choice of religion, fast food, brand of toothpaste, education, gender preference, and smoking preference!

No Smokers Stink... period

Although banning smoking will only allow a move towards banning alcohol then will be banning travel during certain times... etc etc, smoking although detramental and stinky is still a liberty.. leave it be.

Back in the late 1940's and early 50's the government was setting off nuclear explosions in the atmosphere on a regular basis on American soil. They were pumping the radioactive particles right up into the jet stream and shooting them across the entire continent. Then they realized how stupid that was and started burying the bombs they tested.

There was just one problem. All of the radiation that was already out there from the tests they had already done.

The simple solution was to have the Surgeon General jump up and declare, "OMG! Smoking causes cancer!"

From that time on all cancers and most deaths have been blamed on smoking, when in reality the cancers and deaths were from the radioactive particles the government unleashed upon its own citizens with it's nuclear tests.

Yep, it's another conspiracy.

reply to post by mrwupy


Just out of curiousity..... Do you have a source for backing this claim up? This is great information and any supporting sources are firstly welcomed.

The purpose of this thread is to inform all Smokers and Non-Smokers. Most antismoking activist are ill-informed armed with false information. Their only reason for anti-smoking rages are because they think it is a smelly and nasty habit. I say obesity is also a nasty habit, but to each his own. We live in America. BACK OFF!

Thanks guys. I often tell people that scoff at me smoking that their rush hour drive is 400% worse than smelling a cigarette. Ignorant fools, all of them!

Originally posted by mrwupy
There was just one problem. All of the radiation that was already out there from the tests they had already done.

The simple solution was to have the Surgeon General jump up and declare, "OMG! Smoking causes cancer!"

While we can debate the causes of cancer, we cannot debate the causes of a tar lung and emphysema.

Originally posted by Amaxium
reply to post by mrwupy

 

Just out of curiousity..... Do you have a source for backing this claim up? This is great information and any supporting sources are firstly welcomed.

Actually, I made that up. I suspect it's true but so far I'm the only person that has actually considered it.

So far there is only one source for this information, me, and I have nothing to back it up except our general history and the fact that it actually makes sense.

Sorry. I should have said this much in my first post. I hope I wasn't too mis-leading.

wupy

Probably much worse in rush hour than our cigarrette. There is a reason why they do not have carbon monoxide monitoring stations inside most major cities. In Dallas, we have (last I checked) 7 air quality monitoring stations. Only 2 of them were rigged with carbon monoxide monitoring. Those 2 which are rigged for carbon monoxide monitoring are located well outside of the city where air is significantly bit less polluted than a busy highway. Since then I believe more carbon monoxide monitoring stations have been put up. I cannot find any sources as of yet though. Many proposals but none seen followed through.

-

When presenting the anit-smoking crowd with facts they often just fall back on the only thing they can.

"Yeah, but it's stinky and smelly and just plain gross"

So I guess by that logic we should ban everything that stinks. Like the guy at the bar wearing way too much cologne, or the girl wearing too much perfume, or the fat ass chugging down 10 greasy cheeseburgers and farting two tables over at that restaraunt that is all NON SMOKING.

I swear I would rather smell cigarette smoke than nasty cologne, sweat, vomit, urine, fart smell at the local dance club.

I smoke and have quit once for a whole year. Can't believe I started again but with any addiction, in times of extreme stress, relapse is common.

It is the ADDICTION that needs to be snuffed out. BAN nicotine and all ADDICTIVE ingredients.

If they can market zero alcohol wine, beer. Sugar free treats, fat free treats, codeine free pain meds... GM whole foods that have features bred in and out of em etc.


There's NO EXCUSE and NO REASON to have nicotine & tar present.

A cigarette should be a guilty pleasure that someone reaches for every few days or weeks, like a box of cookies in the cupboard. Imagine taking a box of cookies with you in your shirt pocket every day.

We are enslaved by the addiction.

Just last night I was out for coffee with my other half and forgot my ciggies. Home was less than a mile away yet I stopped in and got another pack at the store. Home was too long a drive. Addiction!

I thought I had it conquered, and to some degree I did, but soon as my parent's health both started to decline I lost it. Having quit drinking and smoking at the same time I had nothing to take off the edge and planned to start smoking the next day after my trigger event. I slept on it and everything. Drinking wasn't a problem but I quit it since it was a HUGE smoking trigger for me.

Nicotine is a huge part of smoking. The reward system in the brain is treated like a king with substances more addictive than heroin. I know what it's like to quit but I also know what it's like to relapse.

If the addictive substances were taken out of it, there would be no problem. It would be much the same as the occasional cookie or drink of wine. Something you have in your cupboard and sometimes have trouble finding it behind the salt, pepper and other rarely used table items.

reply to post by Yoda411


yeah, true enough, but then no-one has yet attributed either to second hand smoke. the issue that the OP is bringing up is that second hand smoke is not particularly bad for your health, so back off and stop being a pain for all the smokers.

Smoking is bad for you. Yes, there are other things that are bad for you- things that make you fat, things that kill brain cells, things that cause heart disease. But those things don't effect how dangerous smoking is.

Unlike most of you, however, I prefer limited freedom, with some choices made for dumb people who can't make the right one. For instance, I would much prefer smoking be outlawed and thought of to be as bad as heroin and coc aine.

Originally posted by pieman
reply to post by Yoda411

 

yeah, true enough, but then no-one has yet attributed either to second hand smoke. the issue that the OP is bringing up is that second hand smoke is not particularly bad for your health, so back off and stop being a pain for all the smokers.

Secondhand smoke causes other kinds of diseases and deaths

Secondhand smoke can cause harm in many ways. In the United States alone, each year it is responsible for:

* an estimated 35,000 deaths from heart disease in non-smokers who live with smokers
* about 3,000 lung cancer deaths in non-smoking adults
* other breathing problems in non-smokers, including coughing, mucus, chest discomfort, and reduced lung function
* 150,000 to 300,000 lung infections (such as pneumonia and bronchitis) in children younger than 18 months of age, which result in 7,500 to 15,000 hospitalizations annually
* increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma
* more than 750,000 middle ear infections in children

Source: Cancer.org

I realize people are under a lot of pressure because of smoking bans. You just can't argue with facts.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

Originally posted by Yoda411
I realize people are under a lot of pressure because of smoking bans. You just can't argue with facts.

i don't particularly want to argue with you but please don't tell me you are quoting "facts". what you have quoted are estimated statistics.

statistics are of limited use when applied to random systems (ie.% of the american population) because their scope of application is too narrow. they cannot take into account other factors beside the one being stistically studied.

estimated statistics are of even less use because they take the statistical results of a limited study and extrapolate this out to the entire population.

for instance,
"increases in the number and severity of asthma attacks in about 200,000 to 1 million children who have asthma " first of all, the difference between the lowest and highest level is 500%. secondly, there is no mention of what is defined as a child and what level of smoke the children are being exposed to.

the source you gave is also pretty questionable, they rely on sources which are clearly biased. for instance they say "The scientific evidence shows that there is no safe level of exposure to secondhand smoke". this is absolutely incredible, there is no way that it is possible for there to be no safe level of a substance which consists of gases and particles of which there are safe levels.

the point of the thread, i believe, is that it is not logical to attribute the stuff you are quoting to SHS as it does not constitute a proportionate level of toxicity in the atmosphere.

[edit on 15/12/08 by pieman]

Originally posted by Yoda411
While we can debate the causes of cancer, we cannot debate the causes of a tar lung and emphysema.

The tar buildup and emphysema are the smoker's delima, not a person walking swiftly to a public mall and pass by a group of smokers. This person is not exposed long enough to the smoke.

This is a great example of second-hand smoke, however: Parents smoking inside thier house and car with children present for 18+ years. The children are exposed in larger amounts for longer periods of time and have a higher chance of picking up the habit. This is not good. I do not smoke inside any room or building except my garage when it is opened for ventilation. I also do NOT have kids. I do not agree that parents should smoke in any enclosed space with children. They should smoke outside.

Obesity is a bigger problem..... no pun intended.

Obesity increases the risk of many diseases and health conditions. These include–
Coronary heart disease
Type 2 diabetes
Cancers (endometrial, breast, and colon)
Hypertension (high blood pressure)
Dyslipidemia (for example, high total cholesterol or high levels of triglycerides)
Stroke
Liver and Gallbladder disease
Sleep apnea and respiratory problems
Osteoarthritis (a degeneration of cartilage and its underlying bone within a joint)
Gynecological problems (abnormal menses, infertility)

Fast foods perpetuate obesity among many, many, many, many other things and yes obesity is offensive to me. So, if people can walk up to me coughing in my face, grip me out, tell me that I shouldn't smoke. I have the right to walk up to an obese person and tell them they offend me? Tell them they shouldn't be eating fast food, potatoe chips, high sugar sodas, because thier action of eating offends me?

NO!

Do I see a bans on vending machines? No vending machines within 50 feet of any entrance or exit?

The point is. People need to re-evaluate the facts and stop descriminating against smokers. The medical community needs to stop the "smoking as the cause" for seemingly everything! Look at the preservatives we eat for goodness sake. Many of these items could be the cause of the cancer. But no, you have been in contact with a smoker at some point in your life and therefor that is the reason why you have developed lung cancer.

This ticks me off..... I need a smoke now!

i love it when smokers bring forth arguments/debates like this. i really do. i smoked for nearly 10 years and decided to quit one day so i did.
that said, i voted for the smoking ban indoors here in ohio and it passed and i must say, it is lovely. i am not usually a fan of more laws but in this situation i am. it is fantastic to be able to dine in a restaurant or go to the bar and not have to smell that rank odor.

smoking does effect other people and i am glad this state took action against you smokers.

want to hear a funny? apparently cleveland needed a new baseball stadium for the indians. what they did several years ago was raise taxes on smokes in the city of cleveland so they could pay for the job. after it was said and done, smokers paid for it via taxes and they made it a no smoking stadium. bwuahahahahahahaha

edit* obesity offends you?
sure it does man. you're just trying to play difficult here.

[edit on 15-12-2008 by thing fish]

reply to post by thing fish


that's all well and good until they move the fence again. the truth is the PTB are shoving through more and more legislation based on bad science.

if you're okay with that, as long as it makes you feel good about yourself, then that's your lookout.

Originally posted by pieman
i don't particularly want to argue with you but please don't tell me you are quoting "facts". what you have quoted are estimated statistics.

statistics are of limited use when applied to random systems (ie.% of the american population) because their scope of application is too narrow. they cannot take into account other factors beside the one being stistically studied.

estimated statistics are of even less use because they take the statistical results of a limited study and extrapolate this out to the entire population.

While you may be attempting to argue the percentage in which the estimations are wrong, you cannot argue against the fact that people do suffer from second hand smoke. If that is seriously the argument you are attempting to have, please take it up with the surgeon general.

Edit: The Health Consequences of Involuntary Exposure to Tobacco Smoke: A Report of the Surgeon General

I welcome all of you second-hand smoke deniers to debunk this article.

[edit on 12/15/08 by Yoda411]

reply to post by pieman


this is one of the very few instances where i am for more government intervention. there are not many issues that will get me to that point but this business about smoking will.

it does effect everyone. some smokers tend to ignore that fact or spin it so we're being told that cars effect everyone..

the issue is cigarettes. not pollution from vehicles.