Author Topic: Non Smoking  (Read 1231 times)

Offline CyranoAH

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2304
Non Smoking
« Reply #45 on: October 28, 2002, 04:29:13 PM »
So judging by this report, I'm perfectly ok breathing all the smoke from the cigarette next to me in a restaurant?

IMO that study is biased to say the least... no cancer risk... any other risks? Does it affect people with asthma? Any other kind of infections that one may suffer from breathing other people's smoke?

Please...

I am a non-smoker, and I would definitely support such a bill if we actually had it :rolleyes:.

In the States you can choose between smoking and non-smoking areas, smonkin or non-smoking restaurants... wish I had the choice here in Spain, where the ratio of smokers is much higher. :(

Daniel

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #46 on: October 28, 2002, 04:33:34 PM »
Here is another line from that same article.  Its funny, in an ironic sort of way.

1. California is not the first jurisdiction to enact such a ban: Iran did so in 1996- but it was overturned as unconstitutional.

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #47 on: October 28, 2002, 04:37:16 PM »
BTW. On the bias comment.

 The world health organization, set out to prove that second hand smoke DID create health problems.

Offline narsus

  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 832
      • http://www.blueknightsdvb.com
Non Smoking
« Reply #48 on: October 28, 2002, 05:15:37 PM »
thank you easymo

I found that article myself and decided not to post it,

GoFaster I can go grab an article now that says second hand smoke helps alzheimers (sp).

All I am saying is there should be smoking and non-smoking areas, in public places I don't care if it is sectioned off by glass or not. If I want to smoke I should be able to, if you want smoke free you should have that too.

I don't smoke near children, when I take my neices and nephews out we sit in non-smoking. If I am with my smoking friends I should be able to sit in the smoking section.

As far as asthma I think we should out law pollen.

Offline beet1e

  • Persona Non Grata
  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7848
Non Smoking
« Reply #49 on: October 28, 2002, 05:31:38 PM »
sikboy! -
Quote
That's why there's hardly any smoking in Europe and Asia.
You have got to be toejamting me!!! I am appalled at the levels of smoking in countries like France, Italy and Spain. Much higher than Britain or the USA. As for Asia, Japan has one of the highest proportions of smokers in the world! Some 78% of Japanese men smoke. Virgin Atlantic Airlines is a non smoking airline like most of the others. But as far as I know, an exception is made for flights to and from Tokyo.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Non Smoking
« Reply #50 on: October 28, 2002, 06:07:02 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by easymo
BTW. On the bias comment.

 The world health organization, set out to prove that second hand smoke DID create health problems.


I'm wondering how they concluded something different than the American Medical Association.

http://www.ama-assn.org/ama1/pub/upload/mm/375/fundamentalscia.pdf
sand

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #51 on: October 28, 2002, 06:09:26 PM »
I'm wondering how they concluded something different than the American Medical Association.

LOL. Your kidding, right?

Americans for Nonsmokers rights.  Now, there is an unbised group. :D
« Last Edit: October 28, 2002, 06:15:06 PM by easymo »

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Non Smoking
« Reply #52 on: October 28, 2002, 06:15:36 PM »
sand

Offline Sikboy

  • Platinum Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6702
Non Smoking
« Reply #53 on: October 28, 2002, 06:19:16 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by beet1e
sikboy! -  You have got to be toejamting me!!!

Yes, I am.
Quote

I am appalled at the levels of smoking in countries like France, Italy and Spain. Much higher than Britain or the USA. As for Asia, Japan has one of the highest proportions of smokers in the world! Some 78% of Japanese men smoke. Virgin Atlantic Airlines is a non smoking airline like most of the others. But as far as I know, an exception is made for flights to and from Tokyo. [/B]


I agree. I just thought it was funny that ideas about disregarding the health risks of smoking could be attributed to Americans, and that the reason behind those "American" ideas was the American tobacco industry. In reality, other cultures have the same outlook (and even more so). I know that Phillip Morris and friends have international interests, but I think that it's too much to say that they are the cause for: " Americans having this attitude of 'no harm done' with cigarette smoke."

I was wondering if anyone was going to catch that lol. (Most people ignore me :) )

-Sik
You: Blah Blah Blah
Me: Meh, whatever.

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #54 on: October 28, 2002, 06:52:46 PM »
Sandman.

The world Health Organasation, free of American political pressor (unlike the AMA) Spent 14 years (the only difinitive resurce ever done) trying to prove that second hand smoke causes canser, etc.  They could not do it.  

  You dont have to be a siantist to figure this one out.

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #55 on: October 28, 2002, 06:58:49 PM »
crap.  Now they will want to outlaw booze.

Offline Sandman

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 17620
Non Smoking
« Reply #56 on: October 28, 2002, 07:02:33 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by easymo
Sandman.

The world Health Organasation, free of American political pressor (unlike the AMA) Spent 14 years (the only difinitive resurce ever done) trying to prove that second hand smoke causes canser, etc.  They could not do it.  

  You dont have to be a siantist to figure this one out.


I'm wondering what the Wall Street Journal is spouting then.

According to the World Health Organization, "second-hand smoke harms and kills non-smokers."

http://www5.who.int/tobacco/repository/stp45/health.doc

Quote

The truth is out—tobacco kills. What you now need to know is that tobacco kills non-smokers as well. Let us be clear about it. Second-hand smoke also kills.


The above from: http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2001/en/state2001-09.html
sand

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #57 on: October 28, 2002, 07:48:17 PM »
The findings are certain to be an embarrassment to the WHO, which has spent years and vast sums on anti-smoking and anti-tobacco campaigns. The study is one of the largest ever to look at the link between passive smoking - or environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) - and lung cancer, and had been eagerly awaited by medical experts and campaigning groups.

Yet the scientists have found that there was no statistical evidence that passive smoking caused lung cancer. The research compared 650 lung cancer patients with 1,542 healthy people. It looked at people who were married to smokers, worked with smokers, both worked and were married to smokers, and those who grew up with smokers.

Offline easymo

  • Parolee
  • Silver Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1640
Non Smoking
« Reply #58 on: October 28, 2002, 07:53:26 PM »
Electronic Telegraph October 11, 1998

Suspending the rules of science
Robert Matthews, Science Correspondent

SO NOW the facts are out. With the publication last week of the full World Health Organisation report on passive smoking, anyone can check the accuracy of The Telegraph's exclusive story last March, which disclosed that the WHO had failed to find any convincing evidence that passive smoking causes lung cancer.

Yet there has been little of the publicity which would have been expected for so striking a finding from a major study by an official organisation. But this is passive smoking research, where normal rules do not apply, including those of scientific investigation.

Indeed, the most impressive aspect of the WHO study is how the same political correctness has pervaded the organisation's approach to the scientific evidence.

Following our coverage of the study's findings, the WHO immediately issued a press release headlined "Passive smoking does cause cancer", vehemently insisting that it was "untrue" that the study had "failed to scientifically prove that there is an association [with] passive smoking".


Now that the study has been published, it is hard to see what basis the WHO had for making these definitive statements. So unremittingly negative were the study's findings that it is quicker to state the two statistically significant results it did uncover. The first is a hint of increasing risk with a measure of exposure to environmental tobacco smoke at home or the workplace. Given all the other negative risk findings, however, quite what this trend means is far from clear.

But the other positive result is a real headline-grabber: statistically significant evidence that childhood exposure to cigarette smoke cuts the risk of lung cancer by 22 per cent. In other words, exposure to cigarette smoke can be protective. Such a finding, while surprising, is clearly intriguing, and the authors of the WHO report made it their principal study finding. But in just the same way that the WHO can see "proof" of an extra cancer risk in statistically non-significant evidence, so it can fail to see anything at all in significant evidence for a lower cancer risk.

In the WHO report, the statistically significant finding on childhood exposure is transformed into evidence that "Exposure during childhood was not associated with an increased risk of lung cancer". This is Humpty Dumpty science, where words such as "statistical significant" mean what the WHO researchers choose them to mean.

Offline Eagler

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18194
Non Smoking
« Reply #59 on: October 28, 2002, 08:16:40 PM »
Quote
Originally posted by easymo
crap.  Now they will want to outlaw booze.


is that an admendment too? :)


not booze just drunks
"Masters of the Air" Scenario - JG27


Intel Core i7-13700KF | GIGABYTE Z790 AORUS Elite AX | 64GB G.Skill DDR5 | 16GB GIGABYTE RTX 4070 Ti Super | 850 watt ps | pimax Crystal Light | Warthog stick | TM1600 throttle | VKB Mk.V Rudder