Bloomberg is A Waste Of Oxygen Now He Wants To Hide Cigarettes

Originally posted by BanTv
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

 

Woooah. Talk about challenging preconceived ideas! I'll have to look at those links later, but very interesting and thank you for sharing. It would be nice if law-makers, government organizations like FDA, and health officials would base decisions on facts/science. Anti-smoking nazis are apparently all for health, but then ignore science and mislead the public. So sick. Literally, tobacco or nicotine could be found to CURE or prevent some disease, and these scumbags would rally against it. I think that's the biggest problem. If public health is the agenda, they should be unbiased and open to new information.

Funny you say that. Anti-smoking Nazi's....... Hitler is where all this nonsense started. He absolutely hated smoking. I'm sure he had something to do with that german report of smoking, causing lung cancer. I would also point out, that cancer was almost unheard of until we started testing atomic bombs, and virtually unknown before we started hanging electrical lines everywhere..... Anyone ever heard of a Native American contracting cancer from smoking on the peace pipe? I seriously doubt it.... Tobacco was just something a large portion of people enjoyed doing. A few Nazi's couldn't stand the smell. Since at the time prohibition wasn't feasible, gradual prohibtion via taxation was implemented... And here we are 3 generations removed from the Nazi's and as brainwashed as they could have possibly hoped. I have only known one person in my life to die from lung cancer. She was a life long marijuana smoker and regulary exposed to second-hand smoke. Her doctor said hers was caused by exposure to asbestos....

"It's for the children"
There's my new excuse when I do anything people don't like. He's worth billions, runs a city with millions of inhabitants, but doesn't have anything else to do, except come up with stupid ideas and force them on everyone around him. Kids don't start smoking because they saw a pack. This is all about control.

reply to post by Mykey057420


I keep telling that "bloombug" is a mobster and a dictator and he should never be allowed to become a president, after he finish with the state of NY. Very soon he will declare the US Constitution anti constitutional under NY laws.

Beware of this type of politicians when they think themselves bigger than god.

Originally posted by kykweer

Originally posted by Daedalus
reply to post by kykweer

 

and the whole "second hand smoke will kill you" argument is bunk too...

it's based on a report from the EPA, done in, i believe, the 80's or 90's....and it said that second hand smoke MAY POSSIBLY have a SLIGHT impact on surrounding persons...

the anti-tobacco bunch took that to mean "oh look, smokers are trying to kill us", and so the myth was started that second hand smoke is just as dangerous, if not more so, than actually lighting one up yourself...

i can understand if you don't care for the smell, that's cool...but don't try to make it out like second hand is some massive health risk that's gonna kill you tomorrow..

So it still has an impact? Slightly more sever for children? Like I said, I really couldn't care less who smokes, but people used to smoke in the company of children for years. So that's why im fine with a general ban, just because SOME people were irresponsible, not ALL smokers.

So it's bad luck, but that could go for possibly every law ever made. It's not because everyone breaks them, but as a system we need to say, well if these people just won't listen, then EVERYONE isn't allowed to do it.

and who the hell are you to make that call?

if you had read what i typed, you'd see the words "MAY", "POSSIBLY", and "SLIGHT" as i understand it, there was no conclusive PROOF that there are any lasting effects to being exposed to tobacco smoke..

comprehension is key.

reply to post by kykweer


your answer is that anything that isn't in line with your view is propaganda, paid for by the tobacco companies?

i've seen a few cases where this is true, but it's not as widespread as you believe...

see, as our understanding of medicine and science improves, theories that were once thought to be solid, and completely sound, change...causal relationships are changed, or stricken down altogether..

for a long time, doctors said that masturbation would make you go blind, or cause mental illness....we now know that this is not true, and that it is actually a rather healthy activity...but once upon a time, people were convinced that it made you blind, crazy, and would cause hair to grow on your palms...

point is, what we "knew" was true 50, or 100 years ago...some of it has changed, and is no longer true...and what we "know" is true now, may no longer be true in 50 years....

comprehension is key.

reply to post by YouSir


I think fluoride should be banned as well...

reply to post by Mykey057420


A-ha! I knew they were Nazis! Learn something everyday.
No Smoking in The Fourth Reich!

I learned here that nukes have been tested, what, a couple hundred times? Crazy. That absolutely couldn't be very good for our health. If the soil is more radioactive than it should be, ingesting plants grown in that soil will probably cause issues for folks.

You mention a good point about asbestos. Anyone with an older home should worry more about their home insulation than breathing second-hand smoke on occasion. I don't think smoking at the rate that I do is healthy for me, but I agree that there are so many other things that also potentially cause health problems. You can be a health nut and eat nothing but kale, but living in a polluted city can still do you in. Especially if you go out and exercise daily. So we really can't win lol.

That's funny you mention electricity as well. My entire immediate family suffers from different ailments, and I've been thinking as recently as last night...'I wonder if there is a way to shield ourselves from all the Radio Frequencies/Electromagnetic Radiation'. I know our issues are from different things, but I wonder if changing diet and exposure to EMR might help our bodies heal themselves somewhat.

A little off-topic, but not really. These nazis want to focus on smoking and public health, when there are so many other more important things they should focus on. Surely parking garages and rush-hour traffic are more dangerous to childrens health than second hand tobacco smoke. I mention SHS a few times because I know that is one reason these people hate tobacco...OH GERD MAH FRESH AIR!

reply to post by kykweer


You have some weak a$$ arguments like you are desperate to come up with something.
You MUST really hate cigarettes with a passion.

Anyways

Here is something for ya to debunk.

How long has tobacco been around?
Tobacco has been growing wild in the Americas for nearly 8000 years.
Around 2,000 years ago tobacco began to be chewed and smoked during cultural or religious ceremonies and events.

What year did they discover that smoking cigarettes causes cancer?
The U.S. Surgeon General first released his report in 1964 establishing the link between smoking and lung cancer.

So, let me get this right, .. ... . The human race smoked for about 2,000 years before someone was paid to say there is a link to cancer.

Now, .. Put That In Your Pipe and Smoke it.

reply to post by BanTv


BanTV

Now i want to go slow here so I am typing very slowly (LOL)

If you really want your mind blown, then I will tell you frankly and openly....there are diseases and conditions that smoking prevents and cures!!!

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

For example, in 1889 an anonymous article in the British Medical Journal,30 whilst acknowledging the experimental evidence that the pyridine in smoke kills germs and the evidence that smokers appeared to be at lower risk of diphtheria and typhus, concluded that people who can tolerate tobacco are likely to be robust in other ways and thus able to resist infection; non-smokers, the article concluded, would be ill advised to take up smoking, which would make them more vulnerable. An anonymous article in The Lancet31 in 1913 discusses the ‘pyridin’ content of tobacco smoke and describes experiments showing that tobacco smoke destroys the comma bacillus of cholera; but again it warns that tobacco smoking can ‘give rise to constitutional effects which diminish the resisting power of the body to disease’.

I kind of like that quote. "smokers appear to be more robust that anti-smoker"

Tobacco smoke also cleans a room of germs and viruses because the smoke is "sticky" and removes them from the air in the room so that people don't get infected!

You can do some google searches yourself to show that smokers are often considered more "robust" in other ways as well. (because if your an anti-smoker than you can't possibly admit that smoking is good for something or has any benefit.

The greatest benefit to smoking is its effect on mental health. Nicotene become Niacin (Vitamin B) when it is oxidized (burned). I will leave you to research the effect of nicotenic acid on brain functions and its importance in treating mental health issues like schizophrenia, manic/depression and depression.

The reason a high percentage (over 80 %) of mental patients smoke is because they are self-medicating and many report that smoking is more effective than Big Pharma drugs at controlling their symptoms.

As you learn more, you will begin to understand how inhumane and cruel it is to deny a mental patient the opportunity to smoke and you will learn to truly hate the anti-smokers and understand the evil that they do!

Tired of Control Freaks

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks


BOOM! ahaha

You know, I was reading this, and it made me think of another reason why the "quit or die" mentality is so ignorant and potentially destructive.

"...the brain adjusts to the overwhelming surges in dopamine (and other neurotransmitters) by producing less dopamine or by reducing the number of receptors that can receive signals. As a result, dopamine's impact on the reward circuit of a drug abuser's brain can become abnormally low, and the ability to experience any pleasure is reduced. This is why the abuser eventually feels flat, lifeless, and depressed, and is unable to enjoy things that previously brought them pleasure."

Ok, so basic stuff. Nicotine increases dopamine and the body makes less, meaning that someone quitting after many years of smoking is going to suffer from depression or at least not be as happy as they should be. On the flip side, someone who already has abnormally low levels of dopamine could benefit from nicotine like you said. I know we're talking about smoking here, but it still boggles my mind that these people can be so quick to hate tobacco AND nicotine. It's pretty clear that the Anti-smoking foot soldiers know nothing about addiction or the benefits of nicotine. I'm sure the big guys do, they just get paid off by Big Pharma. Just quit or die, you dirty smelly smoker. So ignorant and infuriating.

It'll be very interesting to watch the reactions of the dogmatic anti-smokers when a ban kicks in for something they enjoy harming themselves with.

People have a difficult time recognizing a slippery slope until they themselves get thrown onto the downhill toboggan.

reply to post by Petriclivicus

love bloomberg)) he is too rich to solve serious problems. his work is his funny hobby